ArticleHuman brain mapping2023
3D-MASNet: 3D mixed-scale asymmetric convolutional segmentation network for 6-month-old infant brain MR images.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence-based segmentation of small renal masses: a multi-center, multi-scanner, multi-sequence study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Human lifespan changes in the brain's functional connectome.Nature neuroscience · 2025Article
- Functional connectome through the human life span.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- VINNA for neonates: Orientation independence through latent augmentations.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- 3D-MASNet: 3D mixed-scale asymmetric convolutional segmentation network for 6-month-old infant brain MR images.Human brain mapping · 2023Article
- Learning Strategies for Contrast-agnostic Segmentation via SynthSeg for Infant MRI data.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Precise segmentation of infant brain magnetic resonance (MR) images into gray matter (GM), white matter (WM), and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) are essential for studying neuroanatomical hallmarks of early brain development. However, for 6-month-old infants, the extremely low-intensity contrast caused by inherent myelination hinders accurate tissue segmentation. Existing convolutional neural networks (CNNs) based segmentation models for this task generally employ single-scale symmetric convolutions, which are inefficient for encoding the isointense tissue boundaries in baby brain images. Here, we propose a 3D mixed-scale asymmetric convolutional segmentation network (3D-MASNet) framework for brain MR images of 6-month-old infants. We replaced the traditional convolutional layer of an existing to-be-trained network with a 3D mixed-scale convolution block consisting of asymmetric kernels (MixACB) during the training phase and then equivalently converted it into the original network. Five canonical CNN segmentation models were evaluated using both T1- and T2-weighted images of 23 6-month-old infants from iSeg-2019 datasets, which contained manual labels as ground truth. MixACB significantly enhanced the average accuracy of all five models and obtained the most considerable improvement in the fully convolutional network model (CC-3D-FCN) and the highest performance in the Dense U-Net model. This approach further obtained Dice coefficient accuracies of 0.931, 0.912, and 0.961 in GM, WM, and CSF, respectively, ranking first among 30 teams on the validation dataset of the iSeg-2019 Grand Challenge. Thus, the proposed 3D-MASNet can improve the accuracy of existing CNNs-based segmentation models as a plug-and-play solution that offers a promising technique for future infant brain MRI studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.