ArticleJournal of digital imaging2023
Non-Expert Markings of Active Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease Photographs: Optimal Metrics of Training Effects.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward Better Response Assessment of Cutaneous Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease: A Report from the National Institutes of Health Consensus Project Task Force.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2026Guideline
- Cutaneous Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease: Clinical Manifestations, Diagnosis, Management, and Supportive Care.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2024Review
- Crowdsourcing Skin Demarcations of Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease in Patient Photographs: Training Versus Performance Study.JMIR dermatology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Lack of reliable measures of cutaneous chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) remains a significant challenge. Non-expert assistance in marking photographs of active disease could aid the development of automated segmentation algorithms, but validated metrics to evaluate training effects are lacking. We studied absolute and relative error of marked body surface area (BSA), redness, and the Dice index as potential metrics of non-expert improvement. Three non-experts underwent an extensive training program led by a board-certified dermatologist to mark cGVHD in photographs. At the end of the 4-month training, the dermatologist confirmed that each trainee had learned to accurately mark cGVHD. The trainees' inter- and intra-rater intraclass correlation coefficient estimates were "substantial" to "almost perfect" for both BSA and total redness. For fifteen 3D photos of patients with cGVHD, the trainees' median absolute (relative) BSA error compared to expert marking dropped from 20 cm
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.