ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Localization-guided segmentation of Gliomas via 3D ReFusionNet.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study presents a localization-guided two-stage 3D framework for the automated segmentation of brain tumors. Methods: ReFusionNet first estimates a single region of interest containing the tumor-bearing region and then segments the whole tumor, tumor core, and enhancing tumor within the localized volume. The framework was evaluated on the UPENN-GBM and BraTS 2021 datasets using recall, precision, Dice score, and the 95th-percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95). Results: On the UPENN-GBM test set, ReFusionNet-A achieved Dice scores of 0.90, 0.81, and 0.77 for the whole tumor, tumor core, and enhancing tumor, respectively. Its corresponding HD95 values were 11.68, 21.53, and 10.49. The localization-guided models generally showed higher precision and lower HD95 values for selected regions, but lower recall and Dice scores occurred in some tumor-core and enhancing-tumor comparisons. On BraTS 2021, ReFusionNet-C achieved competitive Dice scores, although its HD95 values were not the lowest among the models compared. Conclusion: ReFusionNet achieved competitive segmentation performance on the evaluated public datasets. Its principal observed advantages were higher precision and lower HD95 values in selected tumor regions, while performance gains were not uniform across all metrics.
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.