ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Performance of recurrent neural networks with Monte Carlo dropout for predicting pharmacokinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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 segmentation with uncertainty quantification for spinal tuberculosis on fat-suppressed T2-weighted MRI.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Performance of recurrent neural networks with Monte Carlo dropout for predicting pharmacokinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data.Journal of applied clinical 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo quantitatively evaluate the performance of two types of recurrent neural networks (RNNs), long short-term memory (LSTM) and gated recurrent units (GRU), using Monte Carlo dropout (MCD) to predict pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) data.
methodsDCE-MRI data for simulation studies were synthesized using the extended Tofts model and a population-averaged arterial input function (AIF). The ranges of PK parameters for training the RNNs were determined from data of patients with brain tumors. The effects of the number of training samples, number of hidden units, dropout rate (DR), and bolus arrival time delay and dispersion in AIF on the accuracy of the PK parameters were investigated, and the uncertainties for different DRs and peak signal-to-noise ratios (PSNRs) were quantified. For comparison, PK parameters were estimated using the nonlinear least-squares method. In the clinical studies, the PK parameter and uncertainty images were generated by applying the trained RNNs to DCE-MRI data.
resultsCompared with GRU, the computational cost for training the LSTM was significantly higher. The prediction accuracy of GRU decreased with decreasing numbers of training samples and hidden units, whereas the performance of LSTM remained stable. Despite an increased computational cost, MCD reduced the prediction error at low PSNR and improved the quality of PK parameter images. The simulation results recommended using a DR of 0.25-0.5 at low PSNR and ≤ 0.25 for other PSNRs. The clinical studies recommended using a DR of 0.25 and 0.5 for LSTM and GRU, respectively.
conclusionsMCD is effective in quantifying uncertainty in PK parameter prediction from DCE-MRI data and improves their performance, particularly at low PSNR; however, at the expense of increased computational cost. This study helps deepen our understanding of RNNs with MCD and select suitable hyperparameters for creating an RNN architecture for DCE-MRI studies.
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.