Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32503027›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2020

Robustness study of noisy annotation in deep learning based medical image segmentation.

Shaode Yu, Mingli Chen, Erlei Zhang, Junjie Wu, Hang Yu, Zi Yang, Lin Ma, Xuejun Gu, Weiguo Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Shaode YuMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3412-2159
Mingli ChenMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.
Erlei ZhangMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.
Junjie WuMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.
Hang YuMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8869-6166
Zi YangMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2653-7757
Lin MaMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.
Xuejun GuMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6725-6906
Weiguo LuMedical Artificial Intelligence and Automation Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3036-7287

Funding

An artificial intelligence-driven distributed stereotactic radiosurgery strategy for multiple brain metastases managementR01CA235723 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI GU, XUEJUN, LU, WEIGUO · 2019 to 2024
$2.9M
Novel On-line PET Based Intra-Beam Range Verification and Delivery Optimization for Improved Particle Radiation TherapyR01CA218402 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI LU, WEIGUO, SHAO, YIPING · 2018 to 2022
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA218402NCI NIH HHS R01 CA235723
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Partly due to the use of exhaustive-annotated data, deep networks have achieved impressive performance on medical image segmentation. Medical imaging data paired with noisy annotation are, however, ubiquitous, but little is known about the effect of noisy annotation on deep learning based medical image segmentation. We studied the effect of noisy annotation in the context of mandible segmentation from CT images. First, 202 images of head and neck cancer patients were collected from our clinical database, where the organs-at-risk were annotated by one of twelve planning dosimetrists. The mandibles were roughly annotated as the planning avoiding structure. Then, mandible labels were checked and corrected by a head and neck specialist to get the reference standard. At last, by varying the ratios of noisy labels in the training set, deep networks were trained and tested for mandible segmentation. The trained models were further tested on other two public datasets. Experimental results indicated that the network trained with noisy labels had worse segmentation than that trained with reference standard, and in general, fewer noisy labels led to better performance. When using 20% or less noisy cases for training, no significant difference was found on the segmentation results between the models trained by noisy or reference annotation. Cross-dataset validation results verified that the models trained with noisy data achieved competitive performance to that trained with reference standard. This study suggests that the involved network is robust to noisy annotation to some extent in mandible segmentation from CT images. It also highlights the importance of labeling quality in deep learning. In the future work, extra attention should be paid to how to utilize a small number of reference standard samples to improve the performance of deep learning with noisy annotation.

Indexed as

Deep LearningSignal-To-Noise RatioTomography, X-Ray ComputedDatabases, FactualFemaleHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleOrgans at RiskRadiometry

Identifiers

PMID32503027
PMCPMC7567130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.