ArticleScientific reports2026
An improved seam carving method for enhancing the visual field of tunnel vision patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual impairment has various forms all of which negatively affect the patient's daily activities and prevent performing simple actions like walking safely in a street. Content-aware image retargeting can be used to enhance the scene for patients who have limited visual field i.e. tunnel vision. A modified Seam Carving method is presented in this research paper which can decrease the width of the input image to fit in the patient's angle of vision while preserving the important objects in the original image as well as the image details. The method enhanced the original Seam Carving by calculating the energy map using multiscale image fusion that combines depth, saliency, foreground segmentation, and edge detection features, and used a forward-middle approach for the seam removal step. The results showed efficiency that outperformed various retargeting methods, achieving a 30.8% improvement in the composite score that integrates structural, perceptual, and feature-based quality metrics. Statistical analysis using paired t-tests ([Formula: see text]) confirmed statistically significant improvements across all major metrics ([Formula: see text]), including SSIM, SIFT feature matching, and modern deep learning-based perceptual quality metrics, compared to the baseline seam carving method.
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.