ArticleScientific reports2025
A novel open-source ultrasound dataset with deep learning benchmarks for spinal cord injury localization and anatomical segmentation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accelerating Focused Ultrasound Modeling in Heterogeneous Spinal Cord Anatomy With Vision Transformer Operator Networks.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2026Article
- Accurate Segmentation and Three-dimensional Reconstruction Algorithm of Spinal Cord Injury Lesions Based on Multimodal Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Current medical imaging · 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While deep learning has catalyzed breakthroughs across numerous domains, its broader adoption in clinical settings is inhibited by the costly and time-intensive nature of data acquisition and annotation. To further facilitate medical machine learning, we present an ultrasound dataset of 10,223 brightness-mode (B-mode) images consisting of sagittal slices of porcine spinal cords (N = 25) before and after a contusion injury. We additionally benchmark the performance metrics of several state-of-the-art object detection algorithms to localize the site of injury and semantic segmentation models to label the anatomy for comparison and creation of task-specific architectures. Finally, we evaluate the zero-shot generalization capabilities of the segmentation models on human ultrasound spinal cord images to determine whether training on our porcine dataset is sufficient for accurately interpreting human data. Our results show that the YOLOv8 detection model outperforms all evaluated models for injury localization, achieving a mean Average Precision (mAP50-95) score of 0.606. Segmentation metrics indicate that the DeepLabv3 segmentation model achieves the highest accuracy on unseen porcine anatomy, with a Mean Dice score of 0.587, while SAMed achieves the highest mean Dice score generalizing to human anatomy (0.445). To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest annotated dataset of spinal cord ultrasound images made publicly available to researchers and medical professionals, as well as the first public report of object detection and segmentation architectures to assess anatomical markers in the spinal cord for methodology development and clinical applications.
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.