Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41857518›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2026

Comparing YOLO and U-net deep learning algorithms in chronic wound image segmentation.

Indrani Marchal, Zhara Ali, Haroun Ammi, Steven Smet, Lies Van de Voorde, Carolina Varon, Michel-Antony Ngan Yamb, Jhonny Alexander Yunda Sangoluisa, Francois Quitin, Antoine Nonclercq

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Indrani MarchalDepartment of Bio- Electro- and Mechanical Systems (BEAMS), Ecole Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50, Brussels, 1050, Belgium. indrani.marchal@ulb.be.
Zhara Ali *Department of Bio- Electro- and Mechanical Systems (BEAMS), Ecole Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50, Brussels, 1050, Belgium.
Haroun Ammi *Department of Bio- Electro- and Mechanical Systems (BEAMS), Ecole Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50, Brussels, 1050, Belgium.
Steven SmetUniversitair Ziekenhuis Gent (UZGent), C. Heymanslaan 10, Gent, 9000, Belgium.
Lies Van de VoordeUniversitair Ziekenhuis Gent (UZGent), C. Heymanslaan 10, Gent, 9000, Belgium.
Carolina VaronDepartment of Electrical Engineering (ESAT), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KULeuven), Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, Leuven, 3001, Belgium.
Michel-Antony Ngan YambDepartment of Bio- Electro- and Mechanical Systems (BEAMS), Ecole Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50, Brussels, 1050, Belgium.
Jhonny Alexander Yunda SangoluisaInstitute of Information and Communication Technologies, Electronics and Applied Mathematics (ICTM), Ecole Polytechnique de Louvain (EPL), Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Rue Archimède 1, Louvain, 1348, Belgium.
Francois QuitinDepartment of Bio- Electro- and Mechanical Systems (BEAMS), Ecole Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50, Brussels, 1050, Belgium.
Antoine NonclercqDepartment of Bio- Electro- and Mechanical Systems (BEAMS), Ecole Polytechnique de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50, Brussels, 1050, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Deep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedWounds and InjuriesAlgorithmsChronic DiseaseDatabases, FactualDetection AlgorithmsHumansAI toolChronic woundCross-datasetDeep learningU-netWound segmentationYOLO

Identifiers

PMID41857518
PMCPMC13123066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.