Comparative Analysis of Conventional and Focused Data Augmentation Methods in Rib Fracture Detection in CT Images

dc.contributor.authorGoktekin, Mehmet Cagri
dc.contributor.authorGul, Evrim
dc.contributor.authorAksu, Feyza
dc.contributor.authorGul, Yeliz
dc.contributor.authorOzen, Metehan
dc.contributor.authorSalik, Yusuf
dc.contributor.authorAvci, Engin
dc.date.accessioned2026-08-12T17:42:22Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.departmentFırat Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractBackground/Objectives: Rib fracture detection holds critical importance in the field of medical image processing. Methods: In this study, two different data augmentation methods, traditional data augmentation (Albumentations) and focused data augmentation (focused augmentation), were compared using computed tomography (CT) images for the detection of rib fractures on YOLOv8n, YOLOv8s, and YOLOv8m models. While the traditional data augmentation method applies general transformations to the entire image, the focused data augmentation method performs specific transformations by targeting only the fracture regions. Results: The model performance was evaluated using the Precision, Recall, mAP@50, and mAP@50-95 metrics. The findings revealed that the focused data augmentation method achieved superior performance in certain metrics. Specifically, analysis on the YOLOv8s model showed that the focused data augmentation method increased the mAP@50 value by 2.18%, reaching 0.9412, and improved the recall value for fracture detection by 5.70%, reaching 0.8766. On the other hand, the traditional data augmentation method achieved better results in overall precision metrics with the YOLOv8m model and provided a slight advantage in the mAP@50 value. Conclusions: The study indicates that focused data augmentation can contribute to achieving more reliable and accurate results in medical imaging applications.
dc.description.sponsorshipFimath;rat University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit (FUEBAP) [ADEP.24.23]
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study used F & imath;rat University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit (FUEBAP) ADEP.24.23 project equipment.
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/diagnostics15151938
dc.identifier.issn2075-4418
dc.identifier.issue15
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-7911-8965
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-8204-846X
dc.identifier.orcid0009-0000-4598-7847
dc.identifier.orcid0009-0001-6067-5646
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-6278-3221
dc.identifier.pmid40804902
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105013202558
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15151938
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11508/59710
dc.identifier.volume15
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001549819200001
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMdpi
dc.relation.ispartofDiagnostics
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20260511
dc.subjectrib fracture
dc.subjectYOLOv8
dc.subjectCT images
dc.subjectdata augmentation
dc.subjectfocused augmentation
dc.titleComparative Analysis of Conventional and Focused Data Augmentation Methods in Rib Fracture Detection in CT Images
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar