↓ Skip to main content

Deep Learning Techniques for Automatic MRI Cardiac Multi-Structures Segmentation and Diagnosis: Is the Problem Solved?

Overview of attention for article published in IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
patent
11 patents

Readers on

mendeley
787 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Deep Learning Techniques for Automatic MRI Cardiac Multi-Structures Segmentation and Diagnosis: Is the Problem Solved?
Published in
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, May 2018
DOI 10.1109/tmi.2018.2837502
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Delineation of the left ventricular cavity, myocardium and right ventricle from cardiac magnetic resonance images (multi-slice 2D cine MRI) is a common clinical task to establish diagnosis. The automation of the corresponding tasks has thus been the subject of intense research over the past decades. In this paper, we introduce the "Automatic Cardiac Diagnosis Challenge" dataset (ACDC), the largest publicly-available and fully-annotated dataset for the purpose of Cardiac MRI (CMR) assessment. The dataset contains data from 150 multi-equipments CMRI recordings with reference measurements and classification from two medical experts. The overarching objective of this paper is to measure how far state-of-the-art deep learning methods can go at assessing CMRI, i.e. segmenting the myocardium and the two ventricles as well as classifying pathologies. In the wake of the 2017 MICCAI-ACDC challenge, we report results from deep learning methods provided by nine research groups for the segmentation task and four groups for the classification task. Results show that the best methods faithfully reproduce the expert analysis, leading to a mean value of 0.97 correlation score for the automatic extraction of clinical indices and an accuracy of 0.96 for automatic diagnosis. These results clearly open the door to highly-accurate and fully-automatic analysis of cardiac CMRI. We also identify scenarios for which deep learning methods are still failing. Both the dataset and detailed results are publicly available on-line, while the platform will remain open for new submissions.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 787 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 787 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 128 16%
Student > Master 81 10%
Researcher 81 10%
Student > Bachelor 52 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 2%
Other 80 10%
Unknown 346 44%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 157 20%
Engineering 130 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 56 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 1%
Mathematics 9 1%
Other 34 4%
Unknown 392 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2026.
All research outputs
#2,526,906
of 32,871,687 outputs
Outputs from IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
#120
of 4,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,259
of 362,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
#6
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,871,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,384 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 362,901 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.