ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2026
Can incorporating image resolution into neural networks improve kidney tumor classification performance in ultrasound images?
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning has been widely used in ultrasound image analysis, and it also benefits kidney ultrasound interpretation and diagnosis. However, the importance of ultrasound image resolution often goes overlooked within deep learning methodologies. In this study, we integrate the ultrasound image resolution into a convolutional neural network and explore the effect of the resolution on diagnosis of kidney tumors. In the process of integrating the image resolution information, we propose two different approaches to narrow the semantic gap between the features extracted by the neural network and the resolution features. In the first approach, the resolution is directly concatenated with the features extracted by the neural network. In the second approach, the features extracted by the neural network are first dimensionally reduced and then combined with the resolution features to form new composite features. We compare these two approaches incorporating the resolution with the method without incorporating the resolution on a kidney tumor dataset of 926 images consisting of 211 images of benign kidney tumors and 715 images of malignant kidney tumors. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the method without incorporating the resolution is 0.8665, and the AUCs of the two approaches incorporating the resolution are 0.8926 (P < 0.0001) and 0.9135 (P < 0.0001) respectively. This study has established end-to-end kidney tumor classification systems and has demonstrated the benefits of integrating image resolution, showing that incorporating image resolution into neural networks can more accurately distinguish between malignant and benign kidney tumors in ultrasound images.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39215783What 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.