The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology
Open accessAbstract
Quantitative assessment of neuromuscular disorders relies on accurate musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSKUS) image segmentation.However, speckle noise and ambiguous anatomical boundaries pose continuous challenges.Existing convolutional networks often exhibit limitations in balancing detail preservation with noise suppression.Furthermore, traditional multi-scale fusion is prone to transmitting low-level artifacts, causing false positive misclassifications.To address these issues, a robust segmentation network termed CADG-UNet is proposed.The architecture incorporates two tailored modules to process specific acoustic interference.In the encoding path, the Coordinate Attention and Dynamic Spatial Attention (CADSA) module is designed, combining directional positional encoding with content-adaptive dynamic convolutions.This design suppresses spatially heterogeneous noise while precisely anchoring muscle boundaries.In the decoding path, the Dynamic Gated Fusion (DGF) module is designed for skip connections, employing a post-gating local residual refinement mechanism to filter high-frequency reverberation artifacts from shallow features before multi-scale fusion.The proposed method is evaluated on the MUST and DeepACSA datasets.CADG-UNet achieves mean intersection over union (mIoU) scores of 83.31% and 90.97%, respectively.Statistical significance tests indicate stable cross-dataset performance compared to leading baseline methods.Furthermore, the network yields improved boundary and clinical metrics, including reduced 95th percentile Hausdorff Distance (HD95), lower Average Surface Distance (ASD), and cross-sectional area (CSA) estimations.It also demonstrates significant robustness under multiplicative speckle noise conditions.These results suggest that CADG-UNet provides a reliable approach for automated clinical morphological measurements.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Attention U-Net: Learning Where to Look for the Pancreas
Oktay, O., Schlemper, J., Folgoc, L. L., Lee, M., Heinrich, M., Misawa, K., Mori, K., McDonagh, S., Hammerla, N. Y., Kainz, B., et al. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1804.03999 · Cited by 5,458
Cited by
Past, Present, and Future of Face Recognition: A Review
Adjabi, I., Ouahabi, A., Benzaoui, A., & Taleb-Ahmed, A. (2020) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics9081188 · Cited by 560
Explainable artificial intelligence in Alzheimer’s disease classification: a systematic review
Viswan, V., Shaffi, N., Mahmud, M., Subramanian, K., & Hajamohideen, F. (2024) · Cognitive Computation · doi:10.1007/s12559-023-10192-x · Cited by 195
Metadata
- Venue
- International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-04-13
- ISSN
- 0899-9457 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-1098
- OpenAlex
- W4229750588
- Cited by
- 264
- References
- 1
- Type
- paratext
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/(issn)1098-1098
- The paper
- International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology. (2006). International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1002/(issn)1098-1098
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.