Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40271109›Full record

ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2025

Deep learning-based automatic segmentation of brain structures on MRI: A test-retest reproducibility analysis.

Tomasz Puzio, Katarzyna Matera, Jan Karwowski, Joanna Piwnik, Sebastian Białkowski, Marek Podyma, Kosma Dunikowski, Małgorzata Siger, Mariusz Stasiołek, Piotr Grzelak and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Tomasz PuzioDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Polish Mothers' Memorial Hospital - Research Institute, Lodz, Poland.
Katarzyna MateraDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Polish Mothers' Memorial Hospital - Research Institute, Lodz, Poland.
Jan KarwowskiPixel Technology LLC, Lodz, Poland.
Joanna PiwnikDepartment of Biostatistics and Translational Medicine, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.
Sebastian BiałkowskiPixel Technology LLC, Lodz, Poland.
Marek PodymaPixel Technology LLC, Lodz, Poland.
Kosma DunikowskiPixel Technology LLC, Lodz, Poland.
Małgorzata SigerDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.
Mariusz StasiołekDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.
Piotr GrzelakDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Polish Mothers' Memorial Hospital - Research Institute, Lodz, Poland.
Ernest J BobeffDepartment of Neurosurgery and Neuro-Oncology, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of our study was to assess the reproducibility of deep learning-based automatic segmentation of brain structures in MRI scans across different scanner types and magnetic field strengths, particularly focusing on the comparison between 1.5 T and 3 T MRI scanners. Methods: Our analysis encompassed a comprehensive examination of MRI images, focusing on the consistency of volumetric segmentation. We utilized advanced deep learning techniques with human-in-the-loop as a part of the workflow for segmenting brain structures and compared results across subsequent scans using the same and different scanner types. Results: Our findings revealed high consistency in volumetric segmentation when comparing scans conducted on the same type of scanner (1.5 T to 1.5 T or 3 T to 3 T). The study revealed slightly better segmentation results for 1.5 T scanners compared to 3 T scanners when each was used independently. However, cross-comparisons between different scanner types (1.5 T vs. 3 T) demonstrated slightly less consistency, highlighting the influence of magnetic field strength on segmentation accuracy. Conclusion: This study emphasizes the necessity of using the same scanner type and protocol for reliable MRI studies, particularly for brain atrophy monitoring. The high repeatability of deep learning-based segmentation under these conditions confirms its efficacy for clinical and research applications.

Indexed as

Automated segmentationBrain atrophyBrain MRIDeep-learning neural networkTest-retest

Identifiers

PMID40271109
PMCPMC12018026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.