ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2025
Benchmarking 3D generative autoencoders for pseudo-healthy reconstruction of brain
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. 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.
- Unsupervised anomaly detection with deep generative models: an experimental analysis of model variability and mitigation strategies.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Many deep generative models have been proposed to reconstruct pseudo-healthy images for anomaly detection. Among these models, the variational autoencoder (VAE) has emerged as both simple and efficient. Although significant progress has been made in refining the VAE within the field of computer vision, these advancements have not been extensively applied to medical imaging applications. Approach: We present a benchmark that assesses the ability of multiple VAEs to reconstruct pseudo-healthy neuroimages for anomaly detection in the context of dementia. We first propose a rigorous methodology to define the optimal architecture of the vanilla VAE and select through random searches the best hyperparameters of the VAE variants. Relying on a simulation-based evaluation framework, we thoroughly assess the ability of 20 VAE models to reconstruct pseudo-healthy images for the detection of dementia-related anomalies in 3D brain Results: This benchmark demonstrated that the majority of the VAE models tested were able to reconstruct images of good quality and generate healthy-looking images from simulated images presenting anomalies. Conclusions: Even if no model clearly outperformed all the others, the benchmark allowed identifying a few models that perform slightly better than the vanilla VAE. It further showed that many VAE-based models can generalize to the detection of anomalies of various intensities, shapes, and locations in 3D brain FDG PET.
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.