ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
Sustainable deep learning-based breast lesion segmentation: impact of breast region segmentation on performance.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 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.
- Sustainable radiology: A green future or black scenario?European radiology · 2026Article
- Insertion Network for Image Sequence Correspondence Building.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSegmentation of breast lesions in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) is critical for effective diagnosis. This study investigates the impact of breast region segmentation (BRS) on the performance of deep learning-based breast lesion segmentation (BLS) in breast DCE-MRI.
methodsThe study utilized the Stavanger Dataset, comprising 59 DCE-MRI scans, and employed the UNet++ architecture as the segmentation model. Four experimental approaches were designed to assess the influence of BRS on BLS: (1) Whole Volume (WV) without BRS, (2) WV with BRS, (3) BRS applied only to Selected Lesion-containing Slices (SLS), and (4) BRS applied to an Optimal Volume (OV). Data augmentation and oversampling techniques were implemented to address dataset limitations and enhance model generalizability. A systematic method was employed to determine OV sizes for patient's DCE-MRI images ensuring full lesion inclusion. Model training and validation were conducted using a hybrid loss function-comprising Dice loss, focal loss, and cross-entropy loss-and a five-fold cross-validation strategy. Final evaluations were performed on a randomly split test dataset for each of the four approaches.
resultsThe findings indicate that applying BRS significantly enhances model performance. The most notable improvement was observed in the fourth approach, BRS with OV, which achieved approximately a 50% increase in segmentation accuracy compared to the non-BRS baseline. Furthermore, the BRS with OV approach resulted in a substantial reduction in computational energy consumption-up to 450%, highlighting its potential as an environmentally sustainable solution for large-scale applications.
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.