ArticleScientific reports2024
The two-stage detection-after-segmentation model improves the accuracy of identifying subdiaphragmatic lesions.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Limitations in Chest X-Ray Interpretation by Vision-Capable Large Language Models, Gemini 1.0, Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-4 Turbo, and GPT-4o.Diagnostics (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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chest X-rays (CXRs) are primarily used to detect lung lesions. While the abdominal portion of CXRs can sometimes reveal critical conditions, research in this area is limited. To address this, we introduce a two-stage architecture that separates the abdominal region from the CXR and detects abdominal lesions using a specialized dataset. We compared the performance of our method on whole CXRs versus isolated abdominal regions. First, we created masks for the right upper quadrant (RUQ), left upper quadrant (LUQ), and upper abdomen (ABD) regions and trained corresponding segmentation models for each area. For detecting abdominal lesions, we curated a dataset of 5,996 images, categorized into 19 classes based on anatomical locations, air patterns, and levels of stomach or bowel dilation. The detection process was initially conducted on the original images, followed by the three regional areas, RUQ, LUQ, and ABD, extracted by the segmentation models. The results showed that the detection model trained on the entire ABD region achieved the highest accuracy, followed closely by the RUQ and LUQ models. In contrast, the CXR model had the lowest accuracy. This study highlights that the two-stage architecture effectively manages distinct segmentation and detection tasks in CXRs, offering a promising avenue for more accurate diagnoses. It also suggests that an optimal ratio between the sizes of the target lesions and the input images may exist.
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.