ArticleMethodsX2026
CALM-CXR: a calibration-aware lung-masked workflow for hierarchical chest X-ray classification.
Article in MethodsX, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chest X-ray classification studies often report endpoint performance without isolating how anatomical guidance, staged decisions, probability calibration, and error propagation influence the final prediction. CALM-CXR is a reproducible protocol that operationally couples lung-mask-conditioned regional expert modeling with separately trained normal-abnormal and bacterial-viral stages, stage-specific temperature scaling, calibration-partition threshold selection, and coherent three-class probability composition. Its methodological advance is the controlled, auditable coupling of these established components: each stage retains its own probability and decision parameters, final class probabilities remain mathematically coherent, and errors can be attributed to screening or subtype classification. The protocol was evaluated on 4,840 images using filename-derived group-disjoint train, validation, calibration, and test partitions. Across seeds 42, 52, and 62, the full protocol achieved accuracy 0.7920 (SD 0.0248), macro-F1 0.7999 (SD 0.0165), macro one-vs-rest AUROC 0.9063 (SD 0.0088), and macro PR-AUC 0.8616 (SD 0.0068). Removing lung-mask conditioning produced the largest mean decrease in accuracy (0.0234) and macro-F1 (0.0206) among the component ablations. A matched flat ConvNeXt-Tiny classifier achieved accuracy 0.7955 (SD 0.0135) and macro-F1 0.7982 (SD 0.0128), and paired comparisons did not establish consistent overall superiority of the hierarchical organization. CALM-CXR should therefore be interpreted as an auditable evaluation protocol, not as a new individual primitive or a clinically validated diagnostic system, independent external validation remains necessary. ➢ Defines an auditable two-stage evaluation protocol that separates normal-abnormal screening from bacterial-viral subtyping and retains stage-specific probabilities and errors. ➢ Tests lung-mask conditioning, learned regional routing, anatomy and routing-entropy penalties, temperature scaling, calibration-only thresholds, and hierarchical probability composition through controlled ablations. ➢ Includes matched flat three-class baselines, paired statistical comparisons, calibration metrics, bootstrap uncertainty, and filename-derived group-overlap auditing.
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.