ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Comparing YOLO and U-net deep learning algorithms in chronic wound image segmentation.
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
Chronic wound analysis is crucial for effective wound care, necessitating precise and efficient segmentation techniques. This study explores the use of YOLOv8 and YOLO11, renowned deep learning algorithms for object detection, in medical image segmentation. A comprehensive evaluation was conducted comparing different versions of YOLOv8 and YOLO11 with the benchmark U-Net model using the FUSeg and Wound Data databases. Both databases were used simultaneously for training and testing to achieve a cross-dataset validation, ensuring the robustness of our models, and highlighting the importance of having data from different sources to represent the problem in various clinical contexts, thereby allowing AI models to be more adaptable and generalizable. Results show that both YOLO models significantly outperform U-Net in terms of segmentation accuracy, generalization, and inference speed. YOLOv8n achieved the highest performance with an IoU of 71.7%, a precision of 83.8%, a recall of 77.9%, and a DSC of 79.3%, and, while YOLO11s, the best performing of the YOLO11 models (IoU of 70.1%, Precision of 81.9%, Recall of 79.9%, and DSC of 78.5%), distinguished itself for its stability between thresholds and robustness across datasets. This research confirms that modern YOLO architectures offer fast, accurate, and robust solutions for automated wound segmentation, laying the groundwork for further development in AI-driven wound analysis and diagnosis.
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.