ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
DRIPS: Domain Randomisation for Image-based Perivascular spaces Segmentation.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
33 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Perivascular spaces (PVS) are emerging as sensitive imaging markers of brain health. Yet, accurate out-of-sample PVS segmentation remains challenging since existing methods are modality-specific, require dataset-specific tuning, or rely on manual labels for (re-)training. We propose DRIPS (Domain Randomisation for Image-based PVS Segmentation), a physics-inspired framework that integrates anatomical and shape priors with a physics-based image generation process to produce synthetic brain images and labels for on-the-fly deep learning model training. By introducing variability through resampling, geometric and intensity transformations, and simulated artefacts, it generalises well to real-world data. We evaluated DRIPS on MRI data from five cohorts spanning diverse health conditions (N = 165; T1w and T2w, isotropic and anisotropic imaging) and on a 3D ex vivo brain model reconstructed from histology. We evaluated its performance using the area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) against manual segmentations and compared it with classical and deep learning methods, including Frangi, RORPO, SHIVA-PVS, and nnU-Net. Only DRIPS and Frangi achieved AUPRC values above chance across all cohorts and the ex vivo model. On isotropic data, DRIPS and nnU-Net performed comparably, outperforming the next-best method by a median of +0.17-0.39 AUPRC and +0.09-0.26 DSC. On anisotropic data, DRIPS outperformed all competitors by a median of +0.13-0.22 AUPRC and +0.07-0.14 DSC. Importantly, its performance was not associated with white matter hyperintensity burden. DRIPS delivers accurate, fully automated PVS segmentation across heterogeneous imaging settings, reducing the need for manual labels, modality-specific models, or cohort-dependent tuning.
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.