ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Temporal phase coverage and patient cohort size in deep learning-based cardiac cine computed tomography angiography segmentation.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Annotating all phases of cine computed tomography angiography (CTA) is burdensome. We evaluated how temporal phase coverage and patient cohort size affect deep learning-based cardiac segmentation. Methods: Twelve 3D U-Net models were trained using a 110-patient single-phase CTA dataset or a 20-patient, 20-phase cine CTA dataset. Phase-coverage ablations used one, two, or 20 phases; patient-count ablations were performed within both datasets. One cine patient was used for validation and four independent patients were used for testing. Five cardiac structures were evaluated using Dice and the 95th-percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95). Phase-wise and patient-level Dice consistency and structure-specific volumetric variability within and between subjects were assessed. Results: Full cine training produced higher overall Dice (0.89 vs. 0.87) and lower overall HD95 (4.87 vs. 9.78 mm) than the single-phase reference (both Conclusion: In this cross-cohort comparison, full cine training showed higher overall Dice, lower overall HD95, and greater phase-wise consistency than single-phase training. The evaluated two-phase configuration may inform annotation-efficient cine CTA dataset design, but broader validation is needed.
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.