Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42817299›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Dynamic Consistency-Aware Multi-View Learning with SAM3 for 3D Medical Image Segmentation.

Xuan Chen, Shaolong Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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

2 authors.

Xuan ChenSchool of Computer Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, George Town 11600, Malaysia.
Shaolong ChenSchool of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510006, China.

Funding

Department of Education of Guangdong Province Young Innovative Talents Program Project 2025KQNCX237
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three-dimensional medical image segmentation is critical for clinical diagnosis and treatment planning. Medical images typically exhibit heterogeneous characteristics of low inter-slice resolution and high in-plane resolution, leading 3D CNNs to lose fine edge details via cross-slice feature averaging and traditional 2D slice-based methods to produce discontinuous results due to neglected inter-slice spatial relationships. Multi-view learning shows potential in addressing these issues but lacks sample-adaptive dynamic consistency awareness, as conventional fixed-weight fusion cannot adaptively calibrate view discrepancies for heterogeneous medical data. To tackle this, we propose a dynamic consistency-aware multi-view framework enhanced with SAM3 for 3D medical image segmentation. The framework embeds pairwise cross-view similarity-driven dynamic gating into the multi-view pipeline: decomposing 3D images into three orthogonal views, extracting fine-grained features with a frozen SAM3 encoder, and using a dynamic consistency-aware fusion module that computes pairwise view similarity to dynamically calibrate resolution-induced discrepancies, capture inter-slice and cross-view spatial dependencies, and reconstruct unified 3D features, which are then mapped to segmentation masks via a decoder. Experiments on Automated Cardiac Diagnosis Challenge (ACDC) and infrapatellar fat pad (IPFP) datasets demonstrate that our method achieves superior segmentation accuracy over state-of-the-art approaches, with promising technical performance that supports further multicenter prospective clinical validation.

Indexed as

Imaging, Three-DimensionalAlgorithmsConvolutional Neural NetworksHumans3D medical image segmentationdynamic consistency-awareedge detail preservationmulti-view learningSAM3

Identifiers

PMID42817299
PMCPMC13611391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.