Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci ; 379(2204): 20200208, 2021 Aug 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34218674

RESUMO

SIRF is a powerful PET/MR image reconstruction research tool for processing data and developing new algorithms. In this research, new developments to SIRF are presented, with focus on motion estimation and correction. SIRF's recent inclusion of the adjoint of the resampling operator allows gradient propagation through resampling, enabling the MCIR technique. Another enhancement enabled registering and resampling of complex images, suitable for MRI. Furthermore, SIRF's integration with the optimization library CIL enables the use of novel algorithms. Finally, SPM is now supported, in addition to NiftyReg, for registration. Results of MR and PET MCIR reconstructions are presented, using FISTA and PDHG, respectively. These demonstrate the advantages of incorporating motion correction and variational and structural priors. This article is part of the theme issue 'Synergistic tomographic image reconstruction: part 2'.


Assuntos
Algoritmos , Interpretação de Imagem Assistida por Computador/estatística & dados numéricos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/estatística & dados numéricos , Imagem Multimodal/estatística & dados numéricos , Tomografia por Emissão de Pósitrons/estatística & dados numéricos , Artefatos , Humanos , Imageamento Tridimensional/estatística & dados numéricos , Movimento (Física) , Respiração , Software
2.
ArXiv ; 2024 Jan 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37744469

RESUMO

The Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) is a community-driven standard for the organization of data and metadata from a growing range of neuroscience modalities. This paper is meant as a history of how the standard has developed and grown over time. We outline the principles behind the project, the mechanisms by which it has been extended, and some of the challenges being addressed as it evolves. We also discuss the lessons learned through the project, with the aim of enabling researchers in other domains to learn from the success of BIDS.

3.
Phys Eng Sci Med ; 45(1): 13-29, 2022 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34919204

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES:  To conduct a systematic survey of published techniques for automated diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 diseases using medical imaging, assessing the validity of reported performance and investigating the proposed clinical use-case. To conduct a scoping review into the authors publishing such work. METHODS:  The Scopus database was queried and studies were screened for article type, and minimum source normalized impact per paper and citations, before manual relevance assessment and a bias assessment derived from a subset of the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM). The number of failures of the full CLAIM was adopted as a surrogate for risk-of-bias. Methodological and performance measurements were collected from each technique. Each study was assessed by one author. Comparisons were evaluated for significance with a two-sided independent t-test. FINDINGS:  Of 1002 studies identified, 390 remained after screening and 81 after relevance and bias exclusion. The ratio of exclusion for bias was 71%, indicative of a high level of bias in the field. The mean number of CLAIM failures per study was 8.3 ± 3.9 [1,17] (mean ± standard deviation [min,max]). 58% of methods performed diagnosis versus 31% prognosis. Of the diagnostic methods, 38% differentiated COVID-19 from healthy controls. For diagnostic techniques, area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) = 0.924 ± 0.074 [0.810,0.991] and accuracy = 91.7% ± 6.4 [79.0,99.0]. For prognostic techniques, AUC = 0.836 ± 0.126 [0.605,0.980] and accuracy = 78.4% ± 9.4 [62.5,98.0]. CLAIM failures did not correlate with performance, providing confidence that the highest results were not driven by biased papers. Deep learning techniques reported higher AUC (p < 0.05) and accuracy (p < 0.05), but no difference in CLAIM failures was identified. INTERPRETATION:  A majority of papers focus on the less clinically impactful diagnosis task, contrasted with prognosis, with a significant portion performing a clinically unnecessary task of differentiating COVID-19 from healthy. Authors should consider the clinical scenario in which their work would be deployed when developing techniques. Nevertheless, studies report superb performance in a potentially impactful application. Future work is warranted in translating techniques into clinical tools.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Inteligência Artificial , COVID-19/diagnóstico por imagem , Teste para COVID-19 , Humanos , Editoração , Radiografia , SARS-CoV-2
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA