ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Pixel-Wise Interstitial Lung Disease Interval Change Analysis: A Quantitative Evaluation Method for Chest Radiographs Using Weakly Supervised Learning.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Computer-Aided Detection in Biomedical Applications.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is characterized by progressive pathological changes that require timely and accurate diagnosis. The early detection and progression assessment of ILD are important for effective management. This study introduces a novel quantitative evaluation method utilizing chest radiographs to analyze pixel-wise changes in ILD. Using a weakly supervised learning framework, the approach incorporates the contrastive unpaired translation model and a newly developed ILD extent scoring algorithm for more precise and objective quantification of disease changes than conventional visual assessments. The ILD extent score calculated through this method demonstrated a classification accuracy of 92.98% between ILD and normal classes. Additionally, using an ILD follow-up dataset for interval change analysis, this method assessed disease progression with an accuracy of 85.29%. These findings validate the reliability of the ILD extent score as a tool for ILD monitoring. The results of this study suggest that the proposed quantitative method may improve the monitoring and management of ILD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.