ArticleProceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering2025
Calibrating CT Slice Location and Body Part in Body Part Regression.
Article in Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering, 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.
- Insertion Network for Image Sequence Correspondence Building.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2026Article
- CT CONTRAST PHASE IDENTIFICATION BY PREDICTING THE TEMPORAL ANGLE USING CIRCULAR REGRESSION.Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Body part regression is a promising technique for content navigation in computed tomography (CT) images of the human body. This approach involves predicting a position score (scalar value) for each axial slice in a body CT image. These scores establish a one-dimensional universal coordinate system that can localize content-of-interest across different images. Current techniques for body part regression mostly rely on self-supervised learning by assuming that the scores change linearly with the slice indices. One important issue with these techniques is that the predicted scores cannot provide accurate slice localization because they are not calibrated across different images. This work attempts to (1) quantify the theoretically optimal slice localization error using regression scores under linear assumption (regression on ground-truth scores), and (2) improve the slice localization accuracy by incorporating supervised learning using annotations of several key slices in a small dataset. We propose an innovative data augmentation strategy using selective mix-up, and we compare three common ways of adding supervision: (a) supervised training from scratch; (b) fine-tuning the self-supervised model; (C) semi-supervised training. Our results show that the fine-tuned model with the selective mix-up augmentation achieves slice localization error (7.4±6.9 mm) close to the theoretically optimal slice localization error under linear assumption (6.1±6.5 mm), outperforming all other self-supervised and semi-supervised counterparts (>10 mm). Thus, the proposed model is a good candidate of accurate content navigation tool for body CT images.
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.