ArticleProceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering
Variational Inference for Quantifying Inter-observer Variability in Segmentation of Anatomical Structures.
Article in Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing MRI annotation workflows for high-accuracy deep learning thigh muscle segmentation in athletes.Radiology advances · 2026Article
- Mixture-of-Shape-Experts (MoSE): End-to-End Shape Dictionary Framework to Prompt SAM for Generalizable Medical Segmentation.Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops. IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Workshops · 2025Article
- Understanding and leveraging uncertainties in autosegmentation for radiotherapy.BJR artificial intelligence · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lesions or organ boundaries visible through medical imaging data are often ambiguous, thus resulting in significant variations in multi-reader delineations, i.e., the source of aleatoric uncertainty. In particular, quantifying the inter-observer variability of manual annotations with Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging data plays a crucial role in establishing a reference standard for various diagnosis and treatment tasks. Most segmentation methods, however, simply model a mapping from an image to its single segmentation map and do not take the disagreement of annotators into consideration. In order to account for inter-observer variability, without sacrificing accuracy, we propose a novel variational inference framework to model the distribution of plausible segmentation maps, given a specific MR image, which explicitly represents the multi-reader variability. Specifically, we resort to a latent vector to encode the multi-reader variability and counteract the inherent information loss in the imaging data. Then, we apply a variational autoencoder network and optimize its evidence lower bound (ELBO) to efficiently approximate the distribution of the segmentation map, given an MR image. Experimental results, carried out with the QUBIQ brain growth MRI segmentation datasets with seven annotators, demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach.
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.