ArticleScientific reports2026
A multi-task deep learning pipeline for classification, detection, and weakly supervised 3D segmentation of intraparenchymal hematoma on brain CT.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Cross-Subject Registration-Based Augmentation: Alleviating Anatomical Misalignment in Trauma CT for Robust Hemorrhage Segmentation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cross-Dataset Generalization of Deep Learning-Based Detectors for Intracranial Hemorrhage Subtype Localization on Noncontrast Head CT: A Comparative Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study developed a multi-task deep learning pipeline for the automated assessment of acute intracranial hemorrhage and perihematomal edema on non-contrast brain computed tomography. Acute hemorrhage remains a major neurological emergency, and rapid and reliable image interpretation is essential for timely management. To address this clinical need, the proposed framework combined three complementary tasks in a single workflow: classification to identify the presence and subtype of hemorrhage, detection of perihematomal edema, and three-dimensional segmentation of intraparenchymal hematoma (IPH) using a weakly supervised strategy with pseudo-labels derived from edema masks. A total of 10,922 images were analyzed: 6,000 RSNA images, 728 PHE-SICH-CT-IDS slices from 120 patients, and 4,194 BHSD images. These models achieved high sensitivity (0.9584 ± 0.0068) for hemorrhage detection, robust performance (AUC, 0.9330 ± 0.0072) in differentiating subtypes, and reliable identification of edema (detection rate, 0.9873). Segmentation accuracy was excellent for IPH (Dice Similarity Coefficient [DSC], 0.9803 ± 0.0069) and moderate for edema (0.4569 ± 0.1809), with external validation confirming generalizability across centers (0.7549 ± 0.1143) for IPH. By integrating classification, detection, and segmentation, this pipeline demonstrates the potential of deep learning to provide accurate and scalable support for clinical decision-making, enhance diagnostic confidence, and streamline clinical workflow in the acute care setting.
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.