ArticleResearch square2025
Impact of Imaging Protocols on Convolutional Neural Network-Based Pressure Injury Detection.
Article in Research square, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pressure injuries remain a critical concern in clinical care, with early detection essential for preventing progression and reducing morbidity. While thermal imaging has demonstrated promise for early pressure injury detection, the impact of imaging protocol variations and patient skin tone on detection accuracy remains underexplored. In this study, we systematically assess how variations in lighting, camera distance, patient positioning, and camera type influence deep learning model performance for early pressure injury detection using both optical and thermal images. A total of 1680 images were collected from 35 healthy adults across diverse skin tones using a factorial design of 12 imaging protocols in a controlled environment where localized cooling was induced to simulate temperature changes. Three deep learning model architectures (MobileNetV2, InceptionNetV3, ResNet50) were evaluated to assess protocol robustness. Thermal imaging significantly outperformed optical imaging, achieving >90% accuracy across models with minimal sensitivity to protocol variations. In contrast, optical performance varied substantially across protocols (32-55% accuracy), demonstrating significant protocol dependency that could impact clinical implementation. Cross-subject error analysis revealed that models focused on both the cool and warm regions in the images, suggesting that current static labeling approaches may be inadequate for dynamic thermal imaging applications. These findings establish the robustness of deep learning models trained on thermal imaging data across diverse skin tones and imaging conditions, providing a critical foundation for future clinical validation in pressure injury detection applications.
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.