Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software
Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Robert R. Ileșan [verfasserIn] Michel Beyer [verfasserIn] Christoph Kunz [verfasserIn] Florian M. Thieringer [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2023 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Bioengineering - MDPI AG, 2014, 10(2023), 5, p 604 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:10 ; year:2023 ; number:5, p 604 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ09441713X |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | DOAJ09441713X | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240413034644.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 240413s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/bioengineering10050604 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ09441713X | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
050 | 0 | |a QH301-705.5 | |
100 | 0 | |a Robert R. Ileșan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software |
264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. | ||
650 | 4 | |a artificial intelligence | |
650 | 4 | |a mandible | |
650 | 4 | |a segmentation | |
650 | 4 | |a 3D virtual reconstruction | |
650 | 4 | |a CBCT | |
650 | 4 | |a CT | |
653 | 0 | |a Technology | |
653 | 0 | |a T | |
653 | 0 | |a Biology (General) | |
700 | 0 | |a Michel Beyer |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Christoph Kunz |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Florian M. Thieringer |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Bioengineering |d MDPI AG, 2014 |g 10(2023), 5, p 604 |w (DE-627)774814020 |w (DE-600)2746191-9 |x 23065354 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:10 |g year:2023 |g number:5, p 604 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 10 |j 2023 |e 5, p 604 |
author_variant |
r r i rri m b mb c k ck f m t fmt |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:23065354:2023----::oprsnfriiilnelgneaeapiainfradbeemnainrmsalsepa |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2023 |
callnumber-subject-code |
QH |
publishDate |
2023 |
allfields |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 doi (DE-627)DOAJ09441713X (DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Robert R. Ileșan verfasserin aut Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. artificial intelligence mandible segmentation 3D virtual reconstruction CBCT CT Technology T Biology (General) Michel Beyer verfasserin aut Christoph Kunz verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Bioengineering MDPI AG, 2014 10(2023), 5, p 604 (DE-627)774814020 (DE-600)2746191-9 23065354 nnns volume:10 year:2023 number:5, p 604 https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2023 5, p 604 |
spelling |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 doi (DE-627)DOAJ09441713X (DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Robert R. Ileșan verfasserin aut Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. artificial intelligence mandible segmentation 3D virtual reconstruction CBCT CT Technology T Biology (General) Michel Beyer verfasserin aut Christoph Kunz verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Bioengineering MDPI AG, 2014 10(2023), 5, p 604 (DE-627)774814020 (DE-600)2746191-9 23065354 nnns volume:10 year:2023 number:5, p 604 https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2023 5, p 604 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 doi (DE-627)DOAJ09441713X (DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Robert R. Ileșan verfasserin aut Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. artificial intelligence mandible segmentation 3D virtual reconstruction CBCT CT Technology T Biology (General) Michel Beyer verfasserin aut Christoph Kunz verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Bioengineering MDPI AG, 2014 10(2023), 5, p 604 (DE-627)774814020 (DE-600)2746191-9 23065354 nnns volume:10 year:2023 number:5, p 604 https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2023 5, p 604 |
allfieldsGer |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 doi (DE-627)DOAJ09441713X (DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Robert R. Ileșan verfasserin aut Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. artificial intelligence mandible segmentation 3D virtual reconstruction CBCT CT Technology T Biology (General) Michel Beyer verfasserin aut Christoph Kunz verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Bioengineering MDPI AG, 2014 10(2023), 5, p 604 (DE-627)774814020 (DE-600)2746191-9 23065354 nnns volume:10 year:2023 number:5, p 604 https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2023 5, p 604 |
allfieldsSound |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 doi (DE-627)DOAJ09441713X (DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Robert R. Ileșan verfasserin aut Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. artificial intelligence mandible segmentation 3D virtual reconstruction CBCT CT Technology T Biology (General) Michel Beyer verfasserin aut Christoph Kunz verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Bioengineering MDPI AG, 2014 10(2023), 5, p 604 (DE-627)774814020 (DE-600)2746191-9 23065354 nnns volume:10 year:2023 number:5, p 604 https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2023 5, p 604 |
language |
English |
source |
In Bioengineering 10(2023), 5, p 604 volume:10 year:2023 number:5, p 604 |
sourceStr |
In Bioengineering 10(2023), 5, p 604 volume:10 year:2023 number:5, p 604 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
artificial intelligence mandible segmentation 3D virtual reconstruction CBCT CT Technology T Biology (General) |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Bioengineering |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Robert R. Ileșan @@aut@@ Michel Beyer @@aut@@ Christoph Kunz @@aut@@ Florian M. Thieringer @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2023-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
774814020 |
id |
DOAJ09441713X |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ09441713X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413034644.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240413s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/bioengineering10050604</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ09441713X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QH301-705.5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robert R. Ileșan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">artificial intelligence</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">mandible</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">segmentation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">3D virtual reconstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">CBCT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">CT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Technology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">T</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Biology (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Michel Beyer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Christoph Kunz</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian M. Thieringer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Bioengineering</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">10(2023), 5, p 604</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)774814020</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2746191-9</subfield><subfield code="x">23065354</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5, p 604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">5, p 604</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
callnumber-first |
Q - Science |
author |
Robert R. Ileșan |
spellingShingle |
Robert R. Ileșan misc QH301-705.5 misc artificial intelligence misc mandible misc segmentation misc 3D virtual reconstruction misc CBCT misc CT misc Technology misc T misc Biology (General) Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software |
authorStr |
Robert R. Ileșan |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)774814020 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut |
collection |
DOAJ |
remote_str |
true |
callnumber-label |
QH301-705 |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
23065354 |
topic_title |
QH301-705.5 Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software artificial intelligence mandible segmentation 3D virtual reconstruction CBCT CT |
topic |
misc QH301-705.5 misc artificial intelligence misc mandible misc segmentation misc 3D virtual reconstruction misc CBCT misc CT misc Technology misc T misc Biology (General) |
topic_unstemmed |
misc QH301-705.5 misc artificial intelligence misc mandible misc segmentation misc 3D virtual reconstruction misc CBCT misc CT misc Technology misc T misc Biology (General) |
topic_browse |
misc QH301-705.5 misc artificial intelligence misc mandible misc segmentation misc 3D virtual reconstruction misc CBCT misc CT misc Technology misc T misc Biology (General) |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Bioengineering |
hierarchy_parent_id |
774814020 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Bioengineering |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)774814020 (DE-600)2746191-9 |
title |
Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ09441713X (DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 |
title_full |
Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software |
author_sort |
Robert R. Ileșan |
journal |
Bioengineering |
journalStr |
Bioengineering |
callnumber-first-code |
Q |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2023 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Robert R. Ileșan Michel Beyer Christoph Kunz Florian M. Thieringer |
container_volume |
10 |
class |
QH301-705.5 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Robert R. Ileșan |
doi_str_mv |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
comparison of artificial intelligence-based applications for mandible segmentation: from established platforms to in-house-developed software |
callnumber |
QH301-705.5 |
title_auth |
Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software |
abstract |
Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. |
abstractGer |
Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. |
abstract_unstemmed |
Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
5, p 604 |
title_short |
Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software |
url |
https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604 https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25 https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604 https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Michel Beyer Christoph Kunz Florian M. Thieringer |
author2Str |
Michel Beyer Christoph Kunz Florian M. Thieringer |
ppnlink |
774814020 |
callnumber-subject |
QH - Natural History and Biology |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.3390/bioengineering10050604 |
callnumber-a |
QH301-705.5 |
up_date |
2024-07-03T23:02:28.280Z |
_version_ |
1803600787701497857 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ09441713X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413034644.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240413s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/bioengineering10050604</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ09441713X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QH301-705.5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robert R. Ileșan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of Artificial Intelligence-Based Applications for Mandible Segmentation: From Established Platforms to In-House-Developed Software</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Medical image segmentation, whether semi-automatically or manually, is labor-intensive, subjective, and needs specialized personnel. The fully automated segmentation process recently gained importance due to its better design and understanding of CNNs. Considering this, we decided to develop our in-house segmentation software and compare it to the systems of established companies, an inexperienced user, and an expert as ground truth. The companies included in the study have a cloud-based option that performs accurately in clinical routine (dice similarity coefficient of 0.912 to 0.949) with an average segmentation time ranging from 3′54″ to 85′54″. Our in-house model achieved an accuracy of 94.24% compared to the best-performing software and had the shortest mean segmentation time of 2′03″. During the study, developing in-house segmentation software gave us a glimpse into the strenuous work that companies face when offering clinically relevant solutions. All the problems encountered were discussed with the companies and solved, so both parties benefited from this experience. In doing so, we demonstrated that fully automated segmentation needs further research and collaboration between academics and the private sector to achieve full acceptance in clinical routines.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">artificial intelligence</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">mandible</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">segmentation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">3D virtual reconstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">CBCT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">CT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Technology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">T</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Biology (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Michel Beyer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Christoph Kunz</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian M. Thieringer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Bioengineering</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">10(2023), 5, p 604</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)774814020</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2746191-9</subfield><subfield code="x">23065354</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5, p 604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10050604</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/ad5687fd037c40ca8e59902ccc95ca25</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/5/604</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2306-5354</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">5, p 604</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.3991575 |