ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Deep learning models for pulmonary embolism segmentation on dual-energy CT: performance analysis and image quality correlation.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 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
RATIONALE AND
objectivesTo evaluate the segmentation performance of dual-energy computed tomography (CT) reconstructed images for pulmonary embolism (PE) and investigate the relationship between segmentation performance and image quality.
methodsA retrospective study analyzed dual-energy computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) data from 57 patients, divided into two datasets (Dataset1 and Dataset2) based on case complexity. Virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs) at 40 keV, 60 keV, 80 keV, and 100 keV, along with iodine map, were reconstructed and manually segmented by radiologists to delineate PE. After augmentation, 18,490 images were split into training and test sets. Five deep learning models were applied to segment different dual-energy reconstructed images, were evaluated using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), Intersection over Union (IoU), Recall, and Precision. Image quality was evaluated, and its correlations with segmentation performance were analyzed using Pearson, Spearman, and Kendall correlation coefficients.
resultsIn Dataset 1, the 80 keV images achieved the best segmentation performance, with a DSC of 0.565 ± 0.032, recall of 0.596 ± 0.060, IoU of 0.439 ± 0.035, and precision of 0.634 ± 0.059. In Dataset 2, the 60 keV images performed best, with corresponding values of 0.656 ± 0.031, 0.663 ± 0.035, 0.533 ± 0.034, and 0.719 ± 0.034. Among all five segmentation models, Attention UNet consistently achieved the highest performance, with a DSC of 0.545 ± 0.046 on Dataset 1 and 0.649 ± 0.045 on Dataset 2. Segmentation performance was strongly correlated with subjective opinion score, with Pearson, Spearman, and Kendall correlation coefficients of 0.983, 0.800, and 0.667.
conclusionThe 60 keV and 80 keV VMIs consistently demonstrated the most favorable and stable performance trends across datasets of varying complexities, with Attention UNet outperforming the other models. Furthermore, segmentation performance was strongly correlated with subjective opinion score, whereas its correlation with objective image quality metrics such as SNR and CNR was weak and negative.
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.