ArticlePloS one2026
A public generalizable AI tool for automated segmentation of coronal brain tissue slabs for 3D neuropathology.
Article in PloS one, 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in image registration and machine learning have recently enabled volumetric analysis of postmortem brain tissue from conventional photographs of coronal slabs, which are routinely collected in brain banks and neuropathology laboratories around the world. One caveat of this methodology is the requirement of segmentation of the tissue from the background and out-of-slice tissue in photographs, which currently requires laborious manual intervention. Manual delineation is a bottleneck in this process and poses challenges in scalability, and resources, restricting adoption of these methods. In this article, we present a deep learning model to automate this process. The automatic segmentation tool relies on a U-Net architecture that was trained with a combination of 1,414 manually segmented images of both fixed and fresh tissue, from specimens with varying diagnoses, photographed at two different sites. Automated model predictions on a subset of photographs not seen in training were analyzed to estimate performance compared to manual labels, including both inter- and intra-rater variability. Our model achieved a median Dice score over 0.98, mean surface distance under 0.4 mm, and 95% Hausdorff distance under 1.60 mm, which approaches inter-/intra-rater levels. Our tool is publicly available at surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/PhotoTools and training data is available at https://zenodo.org/records/20647553.
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.