ArticleEmergency radiology2025
Deep learning-aided diagnosis of acute abdominal aortic dissection by ultrasound images.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2025. 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.
- Multimodal imaging of acquired aortic diseases: clinical efficacy, comparative analysis, and future perspectives.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAcute abdominal aortic dissection (AD) is a serious disease. Early detection based on ultrasound (US) can improve the prognosis of AD, especially in emergency settings. We explored the ability of deep learning (DL) to diagnose abdominal AD in US images, which may help the diagnosis of AD by novice radiologists or non-professionals.
methodsThere were 374 US images from patients treated before June 30, 2022. The images were classified as AD-positive and AD-negative images. Among them, 90% of images were used as the training set, and 10% of images were used as the test set. A Densenet-169 model and a VGG-16 model were used in this study and compared with two human readers.
resultsDL models demonstrated high sensitivity and AUC for diagnosing abdominal AD in US images, and DL models showed generally better performance than human readers.
conclusionOur findings demonstrated the efficacy of DL-aided diagnosis of abdominal AD in US images, which can be helpful in emergency settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39821588What 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.