Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39169697›Full record

ArticleAnnals of rehabilitation medicine2024

Extensive Multilabel Classification of Brain MRI Scans for Infarcts Using the Swin UNETR Architecture in Deep Learning Applications.

Jaeho Oh, Hyunchul An

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of rehabilitation medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jaeho OhDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Seoul Daehyo Rehabilitation Hospital, Yangju, Korea.
Hyunchul AnDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Pohang SeMyeong Christianity Hospital, Pohang, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo distinguish infarct location and type with the utmost precision using the advantages of the Swin UNEt TRansformers (Swin UNETR) architecture.

methodsThe research employed a two-phase training approach. In the first phase, the Swin UNETR model was trained using the Ischemic Stroke Lesion Segmentation Challenge (ISLES) 2022 dataset, which included cases of acute and subacute infarcts. The second phase involved training with data from 309 patients. The 110 categories result from classifying infarcts based on 22 specific brain regions. Each region is divided into right and left sides, and each side includes four types of infarcts (acute, acute lacunar, subacute, subacute lacunar). The unique architecture of Swin UNETR, integrating elements of both the transformer and u-net designs with a hierarchical transformer computed with shifted windows, played a crucial role in the study.

resultsDuring Swin UNETR training with the ISLES 2022 dataset, batch loss decreased to 0.8885±0.1897, with training and validation dice scores reaching 0.4224±0.0710 and 0.4827±0.0607, respectively. The optimal model weight had a validation dice score of 0.5747. In the patient data model, batch loss decreased to 0.0565±0.0427, with final training and validation accuracies of 0.9842±0.0005 and 0.9837±0.0010.

conclusionThe results of this study surpass the accuracy of similar studies, but they involve the issue of overfitting, highlighting the need for future efforts to improve generalizability. Such detailed classifications could significantly aid physicians in diagnosing infarcts in clinical settings.

Indexed as

ClassificationDeep learningInfarctionRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID39169697
PMCPMC11372279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.