ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Weakly supervised anatomical feature learning for cross-dataset ejection fraction estimation from echocardiography videos.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEjection fraction (EF) is a central measure of cardiac function, but echocardiographic EF assessment remains reader-dependent and sensitive to acquisition quality. Deep learning can automate EF estimation, yet performance measured on a single development dataset may not transfer to data acquired under different imaging and annotation conventions. We investigated whether anatomically constrained weakly supervised learning improves cross-dataset EF estimation.
methodsWe propose CAFEx, a contrastive-augmented feature extraction pipeline that combines left ventricular segmentation, echocardiography-specific augmentation, mask-derived anatomical features, and temporal EF regression. The model was trained on EchoNet-Dynamic using video-level EF labels with limited dense annotations for the anatomical component. External evaluation was performed on CAMUS after image harmonization and recalculation of an apical-four-chamber monoplane EF endpoint. Performance was compared with reproduced segmentation-based, direct video-regression, graph-based, transformer-based, and feature-extraction baselines using Dice score, mean absolute error, and coefficient of determination.
resultsIn the harmonized train-on-EchoNet/test-on-CAMUS benchmark, anatomically constrained models degraded less than direct video-regression baselines. CAFEx achieved 90.73% Dice on CAMUS and improved CAMUS EF prediction over the strongest reproduced feature-extraction baseline, increasing [Formula: see text] from 0.38 to 0.54 and reducing mean absolute EF error from 7.89 to 6.70 percentage points. Poor-quality videos and extreme EF values remained challenging.
conclusionsWeakly supervised EF estimation can benefit from an anatomical bottleneck learned with limited dense annotation. The findings support controlled external validation under explicit image and target harmonization, while further prospective validation, calibration, and quality-control mechanisms are needed before clinical deployment.
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.