ArticleEpilepsia2026
Convolutional neural networks for automatic tuber segmentation and quantification of tuber burden in tuberous sclerosis complex.
Article in Epilepsia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study was undertaken to develop a fully automated algorithm for tuber segmentation and quantification of tuber volume that performs similarly to the gold standard human neuroradiologist.
methodsWe used brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) to train and validate a convolutional neural network (CNN), which was evaluated on segmentation with the Dice-Sørensen similarity coefficient (DSSC) and on tuber burden quantification with Spearman correlation coefficient against a neuroradiologist's gold standard in the test set.
resultsWe collected 263 MRIs from 196 patients (57% males) with median (25th percentile-75th percentile) age of 4.3 (3.0-10.1) years: 176 MRIs in the train set, 39 in the validation set, and 48 in the test set. The final model achieved in the test set a DSSC of .820 (95% confidence interval [CI] = .799-.840) in the whole brain and in the different lobes the following: .831 (95% CI = .804-.850) in left frontal, .827 (95% CI = .799-.853) in right frontal, .817 (95% CI = .779-.842) in left temporal, .834 (95% CI = .812-.849) in right temporal, .821 (95% CI = .783-.856) in left parietal, .840 (95% CI = .810-.865) in right parietal, .832 (95% CI = .808-.851) in left occipital, and .856 (95% CI = .838-.871) in right occipital. CNN tuber volume quantification nearly perfectly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient) with the neuroradiologist's across the whole brain (.984, 95% CI = .971-.991) and in the different lobes: .966 (95% CI = .940-.981) in left frontal, .973 (95% CI = .952-.985) in right frontal, .936 (95% CI = .888-.964) in left temporal, .967 (95% CI = .942-.982) in right temporal, .989 (95% CI = .980-.994) in left parietal, .983 (95% CI = .970-.990) in right parietal, .992 (95% CI = .985-.995) in left occipital, and .982 (95% CI = .968-.990) in right occipital (all p < .00001). SIGNIFICANCE: We generated, trained, validated, and made publicly available a CNN that achieves a near-perfect correlation with a neuroradiologist gold standard quantification of tuber burden, allows for objective tuber segmentation, and increases rigor and reproducibility in TSC research across institutions.
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.