Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29476392›Full record

ArticleJournal of digital imaging2018

Collaborative and Reproducible Research: Goals, Challenges, and Strategies.

Steve G Langer, George Shih, Paul Nagy, Bennet A Landman

Erratum issuedAbstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Steve G LangerRadiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. langer.steve@mayo.edu.
George ShihDepartment of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Paul NagyRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Bennet A LandmanElectrical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37235, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Combining imaging biomarkers with genomic and clinical phenotype data is the foundation of precision medicine research efforts. Yet, biomedical imaging research requires unique infrastructure compared with principally text-driven clinical electronic medical record (EMR) data. The issues are related to the binary nature of the file format and transport mechanism for medical images as well as the post-processing image segmentation and registration needed to combine anatomical and physiological imaging data sources. The SiiM Machine Learning Committee was formed to analyze the gaps and challenges surrounding research into machine learning in medical imaging and to find ways to mitigate these issues. At the 2017 annual meeting, a whiteboard session was held to rank the most pressing issues and develop strategies to meet them. The results, and further reflections, are summarized in this paper.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMachine LearningResearchCooperative BehaviorElectronic Health RecordsGoalsHumansWorkflowComputer analyticsComputers in medicineMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID29476392
PMCPMC5959829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.