ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2024
Deep learning-based defacing tool for CT angiography: CTA-DEFACE.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- PETWB-REP: A Multi-Cancer Whole-Body FDG PET/CT Dataset with Corresponding Radiology Reports.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Development of a defacing algorithm to protect the privacy of head and neck cancer patients in publicly-accessible radiotherapy datasets.Medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The growing use of artificial neural network (ANN) tools for computed tomography angiography (CTA) data analysis underscores the necessity for elevated data protection measures. We aimed to establish an automated defacing pipeline for CTA data. In this retrospective study, CTA data from multi-institutional cohorts were utilized to annotate facemasks (n = 100) and train an ANN model, subsequently tested on an external institution's dataset (n = 50) and compared to a publicly available defacing algorithm. Face detection (MTCNN) and verification (FaceNet) networks were applied to measure the similarity between the original and defaced CTA images. Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), face detection probability, and face similarity measures were calculated to evaluate model performance. The CTA-DEFACE model effectively segmented soft face tissue in CTA data achieving a DSC of 0.94 ± 0.02 (mean ± standard deviation) on the test set. Our model was benchmarked against a publicly available defacing algorithm. After applying face detection and verification networks, our model showed substantially reduced face detection probability (p < 0.001) and similarity to the original CTA image (p < 0.001). The CTA-DEFACE model enabled robust and precise defacing of CTA data. The trained network is publicly accessible at www.github.com/neuroAI-HD/CTA-DEFACE . RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The ANN model CTA-DEFACE, developed for automatic defacing of CT angiography images, achieves significantly lower face detection probabilities and greater dissimilarity from the original images compared to a publicly available model. The algorithm has been externally validated and is publicly accessible. KEY POINTS: The developed ANN model (CTA-DEFACE) automatically generates facemasks for CT angiography images. CTA-DEFACE offers superior deidentification capabilities compared to a publicly available model. By means of graphics processing unit optimization, our model ensures rapid processing of medical images. Our model underwent external validation, underscoring its reliability for real-world application.
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.