Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42443216›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Sharpness matters: Higher image resolution improves generalization and explainability in chest X-ray classification.

Aditya V Kulkarni, John R Zech, Paul H Yi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Aditya V KulkarniDepartment of Radiology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN, 38105, USA.
John R ZechDepartment of Radiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Paul H YiDepartment of Radiology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN, 38105, USA. paul.yi@stjude.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning (DL) chest radiograph (CXR) models are often trained on downsampled images to reduce computational overhead, despite clinical workflows operating at high resolution. Previous studies have investigated the impact of input resolution on CXR classification accuracy, yet two fundamental pillars of safe and trustworthy AI, explainability and generalizability, remain underexplored. In this retrospective study, we evaluated how training image resolution affects CXR classification performance and explanation quality in internal versus external testing. We trained Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) for disease classification on the SIIM-ACR Pneumothorax and RSNA Pneumonia datasets at six resolutions (ranging from 64×64 to 1024×1024) using five-fold cross-validation and evaluated models on internal and external test sets. Internal performance was high across resolutions (AUROC >0.85), but external testing showed substantially worse generalizability at lower training resolutions, with internal-to-external drops >20% versus 4.2%-10.7% at higher resolutions (512×512 to 1024×1024). Higher resolutions also produced more concise explanations, with the tightest saliency-map coverage at 1024×1024 (<4%) across models and datasets, and improved explanation quality on external data (peak precision plateauing at 768×768 for pneumothorax). Overall, training at higher CXR resolutions improved both generalizability and explainability, providing practical guidance for radiology AI design beyond internal test performance.

Indexed as

Image Processing, Computer-AssistedPneumoniaPneumothoraxRadiography, ThoracicConvolutional Neural NetworksDeep LearningHumansNeural Networks, ComputerRetrospective StudiesConvolutional neural networks (CNN )Deep learningExplainable AIMachine learningNeural networks

Identifiers

PMID42443216
PMCPMC13365246

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.