ArticleAI in neuroscience2026
PIGSKIN: PIG SKull stripping with synthetic Images and Neural networks.
Article in AI in neuroscience, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Robust brain extraction is an essential first step for quantitative neuroimaging, yet no reliable method exists for porcine MRI despite its importance as a translational neuroscientific animal model, particularly gyrencephalic traumatic brain injury (TBI). Porcine anatomy presents unique challenges, with extensive extracranial fat and complex textures around the olfactory bulbs that confound existing human-based tools. We present PIGSKIN, a deep learning framework trained entirely on synthetic data generated from a small set of expert annotations. Unlike conventional approaches, PIGSKIN models brain and non-brain regions separately, applying distinct clustering and transformation parameters to each. This strategy constrains variability in brain anatomy while allowing greater diversity in extracranial tissues, ensuring anatomically consistent label maps in which the brain remains embedded within its surroundings. Additional transformations introduce further spatial and intensity variability, producing a rich stream of synthetic training pairs. During inference, PIGSKIN operates in a single step at native resolution within a standardized cube, preserving fine-scale anatomical detail and enabling generalization across cohorts differing in breed, acquisition protocol, and injury model. The model achieved comparable to expert consistency accuracy (Dice ≈ 0.97), approaching the range of reported inter-rater reliability. Finally, we show that incorporating co-registered T1- and T2-weighted inputs significantly outperforms single-modality training, underscoring the value of multimodal integration for synthetic data generation. Together, these results establish PIGSKIN as the first systematically validated solution for porcine brain extraction and a framework adaptable to other large animal brain extraction tasks.
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.