ArticleScientific reports2022
Bias reduction in representation of histopathology images using deep feature selection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Unbiased Artificial Intelligence: Addressing Bias in Computational Pathology.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- Aligning computational pathology with clinical practice for colorectal cancer.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Review
- Investigation on potential bias factors in histopathology datasets.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A survey of recent methods for addressing AI fairness and bias in biomedicine.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2024Review
- Modelling and targeting mechanical forces in organ fibrosis.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2024Article
- Article
- Deep Learning Approaches to Osteosarcoma Diagnosis and Classification: A Comparative Methodological Approach.Cancers · 2023Article
- Learning to predict RNA sequence expressions from whole slide images with applications for search and classification.Communications biology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Appearing traces of bias in deep networks is a serious reliability issue which can play a significant role in ethics and generalization related concerns. Recent studies report that the deep features extracted from the histopathology images of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), the largest publicly available archive, are surprisingly able to accurately classify the whole slide images (WSIs) based on their acquisition site while these features are extracted to primarily discriminate cancer types. This is clear evidence that the utilized Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) unexpectedly detect the specific patterns of the source site, i.e, the hospital of origin, rather than histomorphologic patterns, a biased behavior resulting in degraded trust and generalization. This observation motivated us to propose a method to alleviate the destructive impact of hospital bias through a novel feature selection process. To this effect, we have proposed an evolutionary strategy to select a small set of optimal features to not only accurately represent the histological patterns of tissue samples but also to eliminate the features contributing to internal bias toward the institution. The defined objective function for an optimal subset selection of features is to minimize the accuracy of the model to classify the source institutions which is basically defined as a bias indicator. By the conducted experiments, the selected features extracted by the state-of-the-art network trained on TCGA images (i.e., the KimiaNet), considerably decreased the institutional bias, while improving the quality of features to discriminate the cancer types. In addition, the selected features could significantly improve the results of external validation compared to the entire set of features which has been negatively affected by bias. The proposed scheme is a model-independent approach which can be employed when it is possible to define a bias indicator as a participating objective in a feature selection process; even with unknown bias sources.
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.