ArticleJournal of imaging2025
Adaptive Normalization Enhances the Generalization of Deep Learning Model in Chest X-Ray Classification.
Article in Journal of imaging, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study presents a controlled benchmarking analysis of min-max scaling, Z-score normalization, and an adaptive preprocessing pipeline that combines percentile-based ROI cropping with histogram standardization. The evaluation was conducted across four public chest X-ray (CXR) datasets and three convolutional neural network architectures under controlled experimental settings. The adaptive pipeline generally improved accuracy, F1-score, and training stability on datasets with relatively stable contrast characteristics while yielding limited gains on MIMIC-CXR due to strong acquisition heterogeneity. Ablation experiments showed that histogram standardization provided the primary performance contribution, with ROI cropping offering complementary benefits, and the full pipeline achieving the best overall performance. The computational overhead of the adaptive preprocessing was minimal (+6.3% training-time cost; 5.2 ms per batch). Friedman-Nemenyi and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests confirmed that the observed improvements were statistically significant across most dataset-model configurations. Overall, adaptive normalization is positioned not as a novel algorithmic contribution, but as a practical preprocessing design choice that can enhance cross-dataset robustness and reliability in chest X-ray classification workflows.
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.