Table 5.
Detailed contrast between the proposed method and previous approaches.
| Authors | Models | No. of patients | Dice (%) | Spine IoU (%) | Vertebrae IoU (%) | Vertebral disc IoU (%) | Mean IoU (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proposed Model | WAEM | 403 | 95.74 | 89.37 | 92.18 | 90.24 | 91.86 |
| Zheng et al.16 | BianqueNet | 223 | 95.51 | 90.35 | 94.25 | 90.19 | 91.60 |
| J. Jairo et al.15 | U-Net | 181 | – | 75.50 | 86.00 | 88.70 | 83.40 |
| S. Wang et al.48 | Improved Attention U-Net | 180 | 95.01 | – | – | – | – |
| Z. Han et al.55 | Spine-GAN | 253 | 87.10 | 87.00 | 81.00 | 87.30 | – |
| S. Ghosh et al.14 | SVM | 212 | – | – | – | 84.00 | 84.00 |
| S. Pang et al.56 | SpineParseNet | 215 | 89.22 | – | – | – | – |
| Cheng et al.57 | MultiResU-Net | 180 | – | – | – | 77.10 | – |