ReviewBiomedical engineering online2024
Self-supervised learning framework application for medical image analysis: a review and summary.
Review in Biomedical engineering online, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Confounder-Matched Deep Learning on Cardiac CT for the Diagnosis of Tetralogy of Fallot: A Proof of Concept.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Radiomics and deep learning for immune checkpoint inhibitor outcomes: imaging-derived immune phenotyping and clinical translation across solid tumors.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Privacy-Aware Continual Self-Supervised Learning on Multi-Window Chest Computed Tomography for Domain-Shift Robustness.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Improving surgical phase recognition using self-supervised deep learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advanced skin cancer prediction with medical image data using MobileNetV2 deep learning and optimized techniques.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Manual annotation of medical image datasets is labor-intensive and prone to biases. Moreover, the rate at which image data accumulates significantly outpaces the speed of manual annotation, posing a challenge to the advancement of machine learning, particularly in the realm of supervised learning. Self-supervised learning is an emerging field that capitalizes on unlabeled data for training, thereby circumventing the need for extensive manual labeling. This learning paradigm generates synthetic pseudo-labels through pretext tasks, compelling the network to acquire image representations in a pseudo-supervised manner and subsequently fine-tuning with a limited set of annotated data to achieve enhanced performance. This review begins with an overview of prevalent types and advancements in self-supervised learning, followed by an exhaustive and systematic examination of methodologies within the medical imaging domain from 2018 to September 2024. The review encompasses a range of medical image modalities, including CT, MRI, X-ray, Histology, and Ultrasound. It addresses specific tasks, such as Classification, Localization, Segmentation, Reduction of False Positives, Improvement of Model Performance, and Enhancement of Image Quality. The analysis reveals a descending order in the volume of related studies, with CT and MRI leading the list, followed by X-ray, Histology, and Ultrasound. Except for CT and MRI, there is a greater prevalence of studies focusing on contrastive learning methods over generative learning approaches. The performance of MRI/Ultrasound classification and all image types segmentation still has room for further exploration. Generally, this review can provide conceptual guidance for medical professionals to combine self-supervised learning with their research.
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.