Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42552968›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2026

Validation of a You Only Look Once-LabelMe Hybrid AI Model for Automated Assessment of Pressure Injury Size and Pocket.

Kento Ikuta, Kohei Fukuoka, Makoto Nakagaki, Makoto Ohga, Yoshiko Suyama, Haruka Kanayama, Natsuko Fujii, Mamoru Konishi, Hiroyuki Nishikawa, Shunjiro Yagi

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 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.

Kento IkutaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4871-4681
Kohei FukuokaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Japanese Red Cross Tottori Hospital, Tottori, Japan.
Makoto NakagakiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Makoto OhgaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan.
Yoshiko SuyamaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan.
Haruka KanayamaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan.
Natsuko FujiiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan.
Mamoru KonishiFocus Systems Corporation, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroyuki NishikawaFocus Systems Corporation, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1335-1623
Shunjiro YagiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1698-0002

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 24K12824Tottori University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative assessment of the pressure injury size (S) and pocket (P, undermining) is essential for evaluating wound healing. Conventional LabelMe annotations often lead to oversegmentation, whereas object detection with You Only Look Once (YOLO) enables accurate wound localization. Here, we developed a hybrid AI model that combines LabelMe segmentation with YOLO gating. This single-centre retrospective study compared two models: LabelMe-Seeded Auto-Recognition (LSAR) and YOLO-gated LSAR (YGL). Model performance was evaluated by concordance rate and weighted Cohen's κ for DESIGN-R staging and by mean absolute error (MAE) and median (interquartile range) for area error. Overall, 1017 wound images (training: 979; testing: 38) were analysed. For S, the YGL model achieved higher concordance (85.7%, κ = 0.969) and smaller area errors than did the LSAR. For P, the YGL model demonstrated higher concordance and smaller area errors than did the LSAR model. The YOLO-LabelMe hybrid model improved the stage concordance and size accuracy compared with LabelMe alone. Despite the residual outliers in P assessment, this approach represents a promising step towards automated, clinically adaptable wound measurements.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPressure UlcerWound HealingHumansRetrospective Studiesartificial intelligencecomputer‐assisteddeep learningimage interpretationpressure ulcerwound healing

Identifiers

PMID42552968
PMCPMC13439211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.