SynthesisFrontiers in medical technology2025
Deep learning for MRI-based acute and subacute ischaemic stroke lesion segmentation-a systematic review, meta-analysis, and pilot evaluation of key results.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medical technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A clinical neuroimaging platform for rapid, automated lesion detection and personalized post-stroke outcome prediction.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-Based Automatic Segmentation of Ischemic Stroke Lesions in CT Perfusion Imaging.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Modeling Ischemic Stroke Pathological Dynamics via Continuous Fields and Vector Flow.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Integration of imaging and clinical biomarkers for cerebral infarction diagnosis via NeuroFusionNet.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- DBENet: Dual-Branch Encoder Network for brain MRI lesion segmentation.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Segmentation of ischaemic stroke lesions from magnetic resonance images (MRI) remains a challenging task mainly due to the confounding appearance of these lesions with other pathologies, and variations in their presentation depending on the lesion stage (i.e., hyper-acute, acute, subacute and chronic). Works on the theme have been reviewed, but none of the reviews have addressed the seminal question on what would be the optimal architecture to address this challenge. We systematically reviewed the literature (2015-2023) for deep learning algorithms that segment acute and/or subacute stroke lesions on brain MRI seeking to address this question, meta-analysed the data extracted, and evaluated the results. Methods and materials: Our review, registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023481551), involved a systematic search from January 2015 to December 2023 in the following databases: IEE Explore, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, PubMed, Springer, and OpenReview.net. We extracted sample characteristics, stroke stage, imaging protocols, and algorithms, and meta-analysed the data extracted. We assessed the risk of bias using NIH's study quality assessment tool, and finally, evaluated our results using data from the ISLES-2015-SISS dataset. Results: From 1485 papers, 41 were ultimately retained. 13/41 studies incorporated attention mechanisms in their architecture, and 39/41 studies used the Dice Similarity Coefficient to assess algorithm performance. The generalisability of the algorithms reviewed was generally below par. In our pilot analysis, the UResNet50 configuration, which was developed based on the most comprehensive architectural components identified from the reviewed studies, demonstrated a better segmentation performance than the attention-based AG-UResNet50. Conclusion: We found no evidence that favours using attention mechanisms in deep learning architectures for acute stroke lesion segmentation on MRI data, and the use of a U-Net configuration with residual connections seems to be the most appropriate configuration for this task. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023481551, PROSPERO CRD42023481551.
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.