Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 373

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fully convolutional multi-scale residual DenseNets for cardiac segmentation and automated cardiac diagnosis using ensemble of classifiers

Open access
Khened, Mahendra, Kollerathu, Varghese Alex, Krishnamurthi, Ganapathy·2019·Medical Image Analysis

Abstract

&NA; Deep fully convolutional neural network (FCN) based architectures have shown great potential in medical image segmentation. However, such architectures usually have millions of parameters and inadequate number of training samples leading to over‐fitting and poor generalization. In this paper, we present a novel DenseNet based FCN architecture for cardiac segmentation which is parameter and memory efficient. We propose a novel up‐sampling path which incorporates long skip and short‐cut connections to overcome the feature map explosion in conventional FCN based architectures. In order to process the input images at multiple scales and view points simultaneously, we propose to incorporate Inception module's parallel structures. We propose a novel dual loss function whose weighting scheme allows to combine advantages of cross‐entropy and Dice loss leading to qualitative improvements in segmentation. We demonstrate computational efficacy of incorporating conventional computer vision techniques for region of interest detection in an end‐to‐end deep learning based segmentation framework. From the segmentation maps we extract clinically relevant cardiac parameters and hand‐craft features which reflect the clinical diagnostic analysis and train an ensemble system for cardiac disease classification. We validate our proposed network architecture on three publicly available datasets, namely: (i) Automated Cardiac Diagnosis Challenge (ACDC‐2017), (ii) Left Ventricular segmentation challenge (LV‐2011), (iii) 2015 Kaggle Data Science Bowl cardiac challenge data. Our approach in ACDC‐2017 challenge stood second place for segmentation and first place in automated cardiac disease diagnosis tasks with an accuracy of 100% on a limited testing set (n=50). In the LV‐2011 challenge our approach attained 0.74 Jaccard index, which is so far the highest published result in fully automated algorithms. In the Kaggle challenge our approach for LV volume gave a Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS) of 0.0127, which would have placed us tenth in the original challenge. Our approach combined both cardiac segmentation and disease diagnosis into a fully automated framework which is computationally efficient and hence has the potential to be incorporated in computer‐aided diagnosis (CAD) tools for clinical application.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.media.2018.10.004

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 63 references

Cited by

See all 373

Metadata

Authors
Khened, M., Kollerathu, V. A., & Krishnamurthi, G.
Venue
Medical Image Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
51
Pages
21-45
ISSN
1361-8415 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2782881426
Cited by
373
References
63
FWCI
20.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Fully convolutional multi-scale residual DenseNets for cardiac segmentation and automated cardiac diagnosis using ensemble of classifiers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.media.2018.10.004
The paper
Khened, M., Kollerathu, V. A., & Krishnamurthi, G. (2019). Fully convolutional multi-scale residual DenseNets for cardiac segmentation and automated cardiac diagnosis using ensemble of classifiers. Medical Image Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2018.10.004

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.