Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 361

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of algorithms for Multi-Modality Whole Heart Segmentation: An open-access grand challenge

Open access
Zhuang, Xiahai, Li, Lei, Payer, Christian, Štern, Darko, Urschler, Martin, Heinrich, Mattias P., Oster, Julien, Wang, Chunliang, Smedby, Örjan, Bian, Cheng, Yang, Xin, Heng, Pheng-Ann, Mortazi, Aliasghar, Bagci, Ulas, Yang, Guanyu, Sun, Chenchen, Galisot, Gaetan, Ramel, Jean-Yves, Brouard, Thierry, Tong, Qianqian, Si, Weixin, Liao, Xiangyun, Zeng, Guodong, Shi, Zenglin, Zheng, Guoyan, Wang, Chengjia, MacGillivray, Tom, Newby, David, Rhode, Kawal, Ourselin, Sebastien, Mohiaddin, Raad, Keegan, Jennifer, Firmin, David, Yang, Guang·2019·Medical Image Analysis

Abstract

Knowledge of whole heart anatomy is a prerequisite for many clinical applications. Whole heart segmentation (WHS), which delineates substructures of the heart, can be very valuable for modeling and analysis of the anatomy and functions of the heart. However, automating this segmentation can be challenging due to the large variation of the heart shape, and different image qualities of the clinical data. To achieve this goal, an initial set of training data is generally needed for constructing priors or for training. Furthermore, it is difficult to perform comparisons between different methods, largely due to differences in the datasets and evaluation metrics used. This manuscript presents the methodologies and evaluation results for the WHS algorithms selected from the submissions to the Multi-Modality Whole Heart Segmentation (MM-WHS) challenge, in conjunction with MICCAI 2017. The challenge provided 120 three-dimensional cardiac images covering the whole heart, including 60 CT and 60 MRI volumes, all acquired in clinical environments with manual delineation. Ten algorithms for CT data and eleven algorithms for MRI data, submitted from twelve groups, have been evaluated. The results showed that the performance of CT WHS was generally better than that of MRI WHS. The segmentation of the substructures for different categories of patients could present different levels of challenge due to the difference in imaging and variations of heart shapes. The deep learning (DL)-based methods demonstrated great potential, though several of them reported poor results in the blinded evaluation. Their performance could vary greatly across different network structures and training strategies. The conventional algorithms, mainly based on multi-atlas segmentation, demonstrated good performance, though the accuracy and computational efficiency could be limited. The challenge, including provision of the annotated training data and the blinded evaluation for submitted algorithms on the test data, continues as an ongoing benchmarking resource via its homepage (www.sdspeople.fudan.edu.cn/zhuangxiahai/0/mmwhs/).

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.2019.101537

Cites

52 of 52 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 52 references

Cited by

See all 361

Metadata

Authors
Zhuang, X., Li, L., Payer, C., Štern, D., Urschler, M., Heinrich, M. P., Oster, J., Wang, C., Smedby, Ö., Bian, C., Yang, X., Heng, P.-A., Mortazi, A., Bagci, U., Yang, G., Sun, C., Galisot, G., Ramel, J.-Y., Brouard, T., Tong, Q., Si, W., Liao, X., Zeng, G., Shi, Z., Zheng, G., Wang, C., MacGillivray, T., Newby, D., Rhode, K., Ourselin, S., Mohiaddin, R., Keegan, J., Firmin, D., & Yang, G.
Venue
Medical Image Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-12
Volume
58
Pages
101537
ISSN
1361-8415 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2966333895
Cited by
361
References
52
FWCI
18.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Evaluation of algorithms for Multi-Modality Whole Heart Segmentation: An open-access grand challenge. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.media.2019.101537
The paper
Zhuang, X., Li, L., Payer, C., Štern, D., Urschler, M., Heinrich, M. P., Oster, J., Wang, C., Smedby, Ö., Bian, C., Yang, X., Heng, P.-A., Mortazi, A., Bagci, U., Yang, G., Sun, C., Galisot, G., Ramel, J.-Y., Brouard, T., . . . Yang, G. (2019). Evaluation of algorithms for Multi-Modality Whole Heart Segmentation: An open-access grand challenge. Medical Image Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2019.101537

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.