Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33588786›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2021

Sensitivity analysis for interpretation of machine learning based segmentation models in cardiac MRI.

Markus J Ankenbrand, Liliia Shainberg, Michael Hock, David Lohr, Laura M Schreiber

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Stability of dynamic radiomics features in cardiac MRI under noise.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Prime Time for Artificial Intelligence in Interventional Radiology.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Markus J AnkenbrandChair of Cellular and Molecular Imaging, Comprehensive Heart Failure Center (CHFC), University Hospital Würzburg, Am Schwarzenberg 15, 97078, Würzburg, Germany. markus.ankenbrand@uni-wuerzburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6620-807X
Liliia ShainbergChair of Cellular and Molecular Imaging, Comprehensive Heart Failure Center (CHFC), University Hospital Würzburg, Am Schwarzenberg 15, 97078, Würzburg, Germany.
Michael HockChair of Cellular and Molecular Imaging, Comprehensive Heart Failure Center (CHFC), University Hospital Würzburg, Am Schwarzenberg 15, 97078, Würzburg, Germany.
David LohrChair of Cellular and Molecular Imaging, Comprehensive Heart Failure Center (CHFC), University Hospital Würzburg, Am Schwarzenberg 15, 97078, Würzburg, Germany.
Laura M SchreiberChair of Cellular and Molecular Imaging, Comprehensive Heart Failure Center (CHFC), University Hospital Würzburg, Am Schwarzenberg 15, 97078, Würzburg, Germany.
Universitätsklinikum Würzburg · DE

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01EO1504
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImage segmentation is a common task in medical imaging e.g., for volumetry analysis in cardiac MRI. Artificial neural networks are used to automate this task with performance similar to manual operators. However, this performance is only achieved in the narrow tasks networks are trained on. Performance drops dramatically when data characteristics differ from the training set properties. Moreover, neural networks are commonly considered black boxes, because it is hard to understand how they make decisions and why they fail. Therefore, it is also hard to predict whether they will generalize and work well with new data. Here we present a generic method for segmentation model interpretation. Sensitivity analysis is an approach where model input is modified in a controlled manner and the effect of these modifications on the model output is evaluated. This method yields insights into the sensitivity of the model to these alterations and therefore to the importance of certain features on segmentation performance.

resultsWe present an open-source Python library (misas), that facilitates the use of sensitivity analysis with arbitrary data and models. We show that this method is a suitable approach to answer practical questions regarding use and functionality of segmentation models. We demonstrate this in two case studies on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. The first case study explores the suitability of a published network for use on a public dataset the network has not been trained on. The second case study demonstrates how sensitivity analysis can be used to evaluate the robustness of a newly trained model.

conclusionsSensitivity analysis is a useful tool for deep learning developers as well as users such as clinicians. It extends their toolbox, enabling and improving interpretability of segmentation models. Enhancing our understanding of neural networks through sensitivity analysis also assists in decision making. Although demonstrated only on cardiac magnetic resonance images this approach and software are much more broadly applicable.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedHeartHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeural Networks, ComputerSensitivity and SpecificitySoftwareAugmentationCardiac magnetic resonanceDeep learningNeural networksSegmentationSensitivity analysisTransformations

Identifiers

PMID33588786
PMCPMC7885570
OpenAlexW3130503102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.