ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2025
Mpox lesion counting with semantic and instance segmentation methods.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Mpox is a viral illness with symptoms similar to smallpox. A key clinical metric to monitor disease progression is the number of skin lesions. Manually counting mpox skin lesions is labor-intensive and susceptible to human error. Approach: We previously developed an mpox lesion counting method based on the UNet segmentation model using 66 photographs from 18 patients. We have compared four additional methods: the instance segmentation methods Mask R-CNN, YOLOv8, and E2EC, in addition to a UNet++ model. We designed a patient-level leave-one-out experiment, assessing their performance using Results: Mask R-CNN model achieved an Conclusions: Instance segmentation methods and UNet-based semantic segmentation methods performed equally well in lesion counting. Furthermore, the ensemble of the trained models showed no performance increase over the best-performing model UNet, likely because errors are frequently shared across models. Performance is likely limited by the availability of high-quality photographs for this complex problem, rather than the methodologies used.
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.