ArticleRadiology. Artificial intelligence2025
Physics-Informed Autoencoder for Prostate Tissue Microstructure Profiling with Hybrid Multidimensional MRI.
Article in Radiology. Artificial intelligence, 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.
- Self-Supervised Deep Learning Framework for Rician Distribution Based Denoising and Modeling of Multi-b Prostate Diffusion MRI.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the performance of Physics-Informed Autoencoder (PIA), a self-supervised deep learning model, in measuring tissue-based biomarkers for prostate cancer (PCa) using hybrid multidimensional MRI. Materials and Methods This retrospective study introduces PIA, an emerging self-supervised deep learning model that integrates a three-compartment diffusion-relaxation model with hybrid multidimensional MRI. PIA was trained to encode the biophysical model into a deep neural network to predict measurements of tissue-specific biomarkers for PCa without extensive training data requirements. Comprehensive in silico and in vivo experiments, using histopathology measurements as the reference standard, were conducted to validate the model's efficacy in comparison to the traditional nonlinear least squares (NLLS) algorithm. PIA's robustness to noise was tested in in silico experiments with varying signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) conditions, and in vivo performance for estimating volume fractions was evaluated in 21 patients (mean age, 60 years ± 6.6 [SD]; all male) with PCa (71 regions of interest). Evaluation metrics included the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson correlation coefficient. Results PIA predicted the reference standard tissue parameters with high accuracy, outperforming conventional NLLS methods, especially under noisy conditions (
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.