ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026
Assessment of Robustness of MRI Radiomic Features in the Abdomen: Impact of Deep Learning Reconstruction and Accelerated Acquisition.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessment of Robustness of MRI Radiomic Features in Four Abdominal Organs: Impact of Deep Learning Reconstruction and Segmentation.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to investigate the impact of deep learning reconstruction and accelerated acquisition on reproducibility and variability of radiomic features in abdominal MRI. Seventeen volunteers were prospectively included to undergo abdominal MRI on a 3-T scanner for axial T2-weighted, axial T2-weighted fat-suppressed, and coronal T2-weighted sequences. Each sequence was scanned for four times using clinical reference acquisition with standard reconstruction, clinical reference acquisition with deep learning reconstruction, accelerated acquisition with standard reconstruction, and accelerated acquisition with deep learning reconstruction, respectively. The regions of interest were drawn for ten anatomical sites with rigid registrations. Ninety-three radiomic features were extracted via PyRadiomics after z-score normalization. The reproducibility was evaluated using clinical reference acquisition with standard reconstruction as reference by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). The variability among four scans was assessed by coefficient of variation (CV) and quartile coefficient of dispersion (QCD). Our study found that the median (first and third quartile) of overall ICC and CCC values were 0.451 (0.305, 0.583) and 0.450 (0.304, 0.582). The overall percentage of radiomic features with ICC > 0.90 and CCC > 0.90 was 8.1% and 8.1%, and was considered acceptable. The median (first and third quartile) of overall CV and QCD values was 9.4% (4.9%, 17.2%) and 4.9% (2.5%, 9.7%). The overall percentage of radiomic features with CV < 10% and QCD < 10% was 51.9% and 75.0%, and was considered acceptable. Without respect to clinical significance, deep learning reconstruction and accelerated acquisition led to a poor reproducibility of radiomic features, but more than a half of the radiomic features varied within an acceptable range.
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.