Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40381000›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2025

AI in motion: the impact of data augmentation strategies on mitigating MRI motion artifacts.

Simon D Westfechtel, Kristoffer Kußmann, Cederic Aßmann, Marc S Huppertz, Robert M Siepmann, Teresa Lemainque, Vera R Winter, Alexandra Barabasch, Christiane K Kuhl, Daniel Truhn and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
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.

Simon D WestfechtelDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany. swestfechtel@ukaachen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7050-9924
Kristoffer KußmannDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Cederic AßmannDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Marc S HuppertzDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Robert M SiepmannDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Teresa LemainqueDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Vera R WinterDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Alexandra BarabaschDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Christiane K KuhlDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Daniel TruhnDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Sven NebelungDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01KD2215BBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 031L0312ADeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft INST222/1261-1Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft LI 3893/6-1Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft NE 2136/3-1Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft TR 1700/7-1HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme GA 101057091Medizinische Fakultät, RWTH Aachen University START ProgramMinisterium für Kultur und Wissenschaft des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen 214-4.06.05.08 - 139057
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesArtifacts in clinical MRI can compromise the performance of AI models. This study evaluates how different data augmentation strategies affect an AI model's segmentation performance under variable artifact severity. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe used an AI model based on the nnU-Net architecture to automatically quantify lower limb alignment using axial T2-weighted MR images. Three versions of the AI model were trained with different augmentation strategies: (1) no augmentation ("baseline"), (2) standard nnU-net augmentations ("default"), and (3) "default" plus augmentations that emulate MR artifacts ("MRI-specific"). Model performance was tested on 600 MR image stacks (right and left; hip, knee, and ankle) from 20 healthy participants (mean age, 23 ± 3 years, 17 men), each imaged five times under standardized motion to induce artifacts. Two radiologists graded each stack's artifact severity as none, mild, moderate, and severe, and manually measured torsional angles. Segmentation quality was assessed using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), while torsional angles were compared between manual and automatic measurements using mean absolute deviation (MAD), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Pearson's correlation coefficient (r). Statistical analysis included parametric tests and a Linear Mixed-Effects Model.

resultsMRI-specific augmentation resulted in slightly (yet not significantly) better performance than the default strategy. Segmentation quality decreased with increasing artifact severity, which was partially mitigated by default and MRI-specific augmentations (e.g., severe artifacts, proximal femur: DSC

conclusionMotion artifacts negatively impact AI models, but general-purpose augmentations enhance robustness effectively. MRI-specific augmentations offer minimal additional benefit. KEY POINTS: Question Motion artifacts negatively impact the performance of diagnostic AI models for MRI, but mitigation methods remain largely unexplored. Findings Domain-specific augmentation during training can improve the robustness and performance of a model for quantifying lower limb alignment in the presence of severe artifacts. Clinical relevance Excellent robustness and accuracy are crucial for deploying diagnostic AI models in clinical practice. Including domain knowledge in model training can benefit clinical adoption.

Indexed as

ArtifactsArtificial IntelligenceImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultFemaleHumansLower ExtremityMaleMotionYoung AdultArtifactsArtificial intelligenceLower limbsMagnetic resonance imagingTorsion abnormality

Identifiers

PMID40381000
PMCPMC12559149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.