ArticleBMC nephrology2025
The problem of segmenting global glomerulosclerosis in gigapixel histopathological images: the borderless glomeruli.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research on segmentation method of elderly cardiovascular disease feature images based on artificial intelligence multi-scale feature fusion.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- GlomNet: glomeruli segmentation network for WSI with diverse staining protocols for kidney disease diagnosis.Frontiers in medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurately segmenting glomeruli in kidney whole slide images (WSIs) is essential for advancing automation in renal pathology but remains challenging in cases of global glomerulosclerosis, where Bowman’s capsule boundaries are often unclear. Conventional machine learning (ML) models perform well on normal glomeruli but struggle with sclerotic cases due to the lack of distinct structural cues. This study investigates the use of the foundation model segmentation generative pre-trained transformer (SegGPT) to address this limitation.
methodsWe conducted experiments at both the patch and WSI levels on a private dataset to evaluate the performance of SegGPT foundation model against three non-foundation architectures, U-Net, U-Net3+, and SwinTransformer + U-Net, trained with and without fine-tuning.
resultsThe study revealed high segmentation performance for normal glomeruli, with non-foundation models achieving mean Dice similarity coefficient (mDice) scores of up to 0.94. For segmental sclerosis, performance was moderate, with scores reaching up to 0.73. In contrast, the segmentation of globally sclerotic glomeruli proved substantially more challenging: Models trained only on normal samples yielded mDice scores below 0.03, and even with fine-tuning on mixed datasets, WSI-level performance remained limited (mDice < 0.16). With only few annotated examples, SegGPT demonstrated markedly superior performance in this scenario, achieving up to 0.43 at the WSI level and 0.74 at the patch level. However, its performance under idealized conditions also reveals limitations in clinical generalization.
conclusionWhile conventional models perform well on normal and segmentally sclerotic glomeruli, their performance declines sharply in globally sclerotic cases, even with fine-tuning. SegGPT showed better generalization in these challenging scenarios, particularly at the patch level. However, its limited performance at the WSI level underscores the difficulty of translating patch-level accuracy to full-slide inference, where contextual ambiguity is greater. These results expose a persistent gap between controlled experimental setups and real-world conditions, reinforcing the need for more realistic evaluation protocols to advance clinical applicability.
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.