ArticleAcademic radiology2025
Disease Classification of Pulmonary Xenon Ventilation MRI Using Artificial Intelligence.
Article in Academic radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of supervised and unsupervised deep learning strategies for denoising hyperpolarizedMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
RATIONALE AND
objectivesHyperpolarized MATERIALS AND
methodsXenon MRI data in six pulmonary conditions (control, asthma, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, cystic fibrosis, LAM) were used to train convolutional neural networks. Network performance was assessed with top-1 and top-2 accuracy, recall, precision, and one-versus-all area under the curve (AUC). Gradient class-activation-mapping (Grad-CAM) was used to visualize what parts of the images were important for classification.
resultsTraining/testing data were collected from 262 participants. The top performing network (VGG-16) had top-1 accuracy=56%, top-2 accuracy=78%, recall=.30, precision=.70, and AUC=.85. The network performed better on larger classes (top-1 accuracy: control=62% [n=57], CF=67% [n=85], LAM=69% [n=61]) and outperformed human observers (human top-1 accuracy=40%, network top-1 accuracy=61% on a single training fold).
conclusionWe developed an artificial intelligence tool that could classify disease from xenon ventilation images alone that outperformed human observers. This suggests that xenon images have additional, disease-specific information that could be useful for cases that are clinically challenging or for disease phenotyping.
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.