ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Precise diagnosis of pediatric posterior cranial fossa neoplasms based on 2.5D MRI deep learning.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Interpretability and performance of a 3D C-vit model for accurate grading of pediatric brain tumors.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The MRI imaging traits of pediatric posterior cranial fossa neoplasms overlap highly, leading to difficulties in preoperative diagnosis. Their treatment strategies differ significantly, and traditional deep learning models have limitations in multi - sequence MRI fusion and clinical interpretability, so new solutions are urgently needed. Objectives: This study aims to develop a 2.5D multi - sequence MRI deep learning framework (ResSwinT) that integrates Residual Network and Swin Transformer, to achieve automatic classification of three main Pediatric posterior fossa tumors-Pilocytic astrocytoma (PA), Medulloblastoma (MB), and Ependymoma (EP), and enhance the interpretability of the model through the SHAP method, so as to provide a more reliable auxiliary decision-making basis for clinical practice. Methods: This study retrospectively collected 309 pediatric patients confirmed by pathology, including 109 PA, 130 MB and 70 EP. The MRI data of these patients included five sequences: T1WI, T1C, T2WI,FLAIR, and ADC. After preprocessing steps such as N4 bias field correction, resampling, sequence registration, and intensity normalization, samples were constructed using a 2.5D image construction strategy, and the ResSwinT model is designed. Its performance was compared with seven deep learning models such as Residual Network 18 and VGG16, and SHAP analysis was used to analyze trait contributions. Results: The proposed ResSwinT model outperforms existing commonly used deep learning models in all classification tasks, particularly showing outstanding performance in terms of area under the curve(AUC) and overall accuracy(ACC). For the PA vs Non-PA task: ACC 89.5%, AUC 0.975; for the MB vs Non-MB task: ACC 93.7%, AUC 0.978; for the EP vs Non-EP task: Acc 87.5%, AUC 0.937. SHapley Additive exPlanations(SHAP) analysis shows that the model pays high attention to the gross tumor volume and its surrounding structures, and its decision-making basis is highly consistent with key imaging biomarkers, verifying the interpretability and clinical relevance of the model. Conclusions: ResSwinT achieves high-precision classification of pediatric posterior fossa tumor through 2.5D multi-sequence fusion and cross-attention mechanism. SHAP attribution analysis reveals the biological basis of the model's decision-making, providing clinicians with an interpretable AI-assisted diagnostic tool, and is expected to optimize individualized treatment strategies.
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.