ArticleRadiological physics and technology2025
Dataset augmentation with multiple contrasts images in super-resolution processing of T1-weighted brain magnetic resonance images.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2025. 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.
- Deep learning approach to super-resolution correction of brain MRI motion artifacts for accurate hippocampal volumetry.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Reducing the acquisition time for magnetic resonance imaging using super-resolution image generation and evaluating the accuracy of hippocampal volumes for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in neurology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the effectiveness of augmenting datasets for super-resolution processing of brain Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) T1-weighted images (T1WIs) using deep learning. By incorporating images with different contrasts from the same subject, this study sought to improve network performance and assess its impact on image quality metrics, such as peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity (SSIM). This retrospective study included 240 patients who underwent brain MRI. Two types of datasets were created: the Pure-Dataset group comprising T1WIs and the Mixed-Dataset group comprising T1WIs, T2-weighted images, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery images. A U-Net-based network and an Enhanced Deep Super-Resolution network (EDSR) were trained on these datasets. Objective image quality analysis was performed using PSNR and SSIM. Statistical analyses, including paired t test and Pearson's correlation coefficient, were conducted to evaluate the results. Augmenting datasets with images of different contrasts significantly improved training accuracy as the dataset size increased. PSNR values ranged 29.84-30.26 dB for U-Net trained on mixed datasets, and SSIM values ranged 0.9858-0.9868. Similarly, PSNR values ranged 32.34-32.64 dB for EDSR trained on mixed datasets, and SSIM values ranged 0.9941-0.9945. Significant differences in PSNR and SSIM were observed between models trained on pure and mixed datasets. Pearson's correlation coefficient indicated a strong positive correlation between dataset size and image quality metrics. Using diverse image data obtained from the same subject can improve the performance of deep-learning models in medical image super-resolution tasks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39680317What 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.