ArticleScientific reports2025
EFCNet enhances the efficiency of segmenting clinically significant small medical objects.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efficient segmentation of small hyperreflective dots, key biomarkers for diseases like macular edema, is critical for diagnosis and treatment monitoring.However, existing models, including Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Transformers, struggle with these minute structures due to information loss.To address this, we introduce EFCNet, which integrates the Cross-Stage Axial Attention (CSAA) module for enhanced feature fusion and the Multi-Precision Supervision (MPS) module for improved hierarchical guidance. We evaluated EFCNet on two datasets: S-HRD, comprising 313 retinal OCT scans from patients with macular edema, and S-Polyp, a 229-image subset of the publicly available CVC-ClinicDB colonoscopy dataset. EFCNet outperformed state-of-the-art models, achieving average Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) gains of 4.88% on S-HRD and 3.49% on S-Polyp, alongside Intersection over Union (IoU) improvements of 3.77% and 3.25%, respectively. Notably, smaller objects benefit most, highlighting EFCNet's effectiveness where conventional models underperform. Unlike U-Net-Large, which offers marginal gains with increased scale, EFCNet's superior performance is driven by its novel design. These findings demonstrate its effectiveness and potential utility in clinical practice.
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.