ArticleZeitschrift fur medizinische Physik2022
Investigation of biases in convolutional neural networks for semantic segmentation using performance sensitivity analysis.
Article in Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik, 2022. 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 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of deep neural networks for segmentation in medical imaging has gained substantial interest in recent years. In many cases, this variant of machine learning has been shown to outperform other conventional segmentation approaches. However, little is known about its general applicability. Especially the robustness against image modifications (e.g., intensity variations, contrast variations, spatial alignment) has hardly been investigated. Data augmentation is often used to compensate for sensitivity to such changes, although its effectiveness has not yet been studied. Therefore, the goal of this study was to systematically investigate the sensitivity to variations in input data with respect to segmentation of medical images using deep learning. This approach was tested with two publicly available segmentation frameworks (DeepMedic and TractSeg). In the case of DeepMedic, the performance was tested using ground truth data, while in the case of TractSeg, the STAPLE technique was employed. In both cases, sensitivity analysis revealed significant dependence of the segmentation performance on input variations. The effects of different data augmentation strategies were also shown, making this type of analysis a useful tool for selecting the right parameters for augmentation. The proposed analysis should be applied to any deep learning image segmentation approach, unless the assessment of sensitivity to input variations can be directly derived from the network.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.