The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Generic Approach to Pathological Lung Segmentation
Open accessAbstract
In this study, we propose a novel pathological lung segmentation method that takes into account neighbor prior constraints and a novel pathology recognition system. Our proposed framework has two stages; during stage one, we adapted the fuzzy connectedness (FC) image segmentation algorithm to perform initial lung parenchyma extraction. In parallel, we estimate the lung volume using rib-cage information without explicitly delineating lungs. This rudimentary, but intelligent lung volume estimation system allows comparison of volume differences between rib cage and FC based lung volume measurements. Significant volume difference indicates the presence of pathology, which invokes the second stage of the proposed framework for the refinement of segmented lung. In stage two, texture-based features are utilized to detect abnormal imaging patterns (consolidations, ground glass, interstitial thickening, tree-inbud, honeycombing, nodules, and micro-nodules) that might have been missed during the first stage of the algorithm. This refinement stage is further completed by a novel neighboring anatomy-guided segmentation approach to include abnormalities with weak textures, and pleura regions. We evaluated the accuracy and efficiency of the proposed method on more than 400 CT scans with the presence of a wide spectrum of abnormalities. To our best of knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate all abnormal imaging patterns in a single segmentation framework. The quantitative results show that our pathological lung segmentation method improves on current standards because of its high sensitivity and specificity and may have considerable potential to enhance the performance of routine clinical tasks.
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
Cited by
Evaluation of candidate vaccine approaches for MERS-CoV
Wang, L., Shi, W., Joyce, M. G., Modjarrad, K., Zhang, Y., Leung, K., Lees, C. R., Zhou, T., Yassine, H. M., Kanekiyo, M., et al. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms8712 · Cited by 299
Self-citationUnveiling COVID-19 from CHEST X-ray with deep learning: A hurdles race with small data
Tartaglione, E., Barbano, C. A., Berzovini, C., Calandri, M., & Grangetto, M. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17186933 · Cited by 211
Mahmoudi, T., Kouzahkanan, Z. M., Radmard, A. R., Kafieh, R., Salehnia, A., Davarpanah, A. H., Arabalibeik, H., & Ahmadian, A. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-07111-9 · Cited by 81
Gao, M., Xu, Z., Lu, L., Wu, A., Nogues, I., Summers, R. M., & Mollura, D. J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE 13th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) · doi:10.1109/isbi.2016.7493497 · Cited by 48
Self-citationThree-stage segmentation of lung region from CT images using deep neural networks
Osadebey, M., Andersen, H. K., Waaler, D., Fossaa, K., Martinsen, A. C. T., & Pedersen, M. (2021) · BMC Medical Imaging · doi:10.1186/s12880-021-00640-1 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Mansoor, A., Bagci, U., Xu, Z., Foster, B., Olivier, K. N., Elinoff, J. M., Suffredini, A. F., Udupa, J. K., & Mollura, D. J.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
- Published
- 2014-12
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2293-2310
- ISSN
- 0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-254X
- OpenAlex
- W1995567168
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.54
- 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: A Generic Approach to Pathological Lung Segmentation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tmi.2014.2337057
- The paper
- Mansoor, A., Bagci, U., Xu, Z., Foster, B., Olivier, K. N., Elinoff, J. M., Suffredini, A. F., Udupa, J. K., & Mollura, D. J. (2014). A Generic Approach to Pathological Lung Segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1109/tmi.2014.2337057
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.