Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36945687›Full record

ArticleArXiv2024

Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation.

Annika Reinke, Minu D Tizabi, Michael Baumgartner, Matthias Eisenmann, Doreen Heckmann-Nötzel, A Emre Kavur, Tim Rädsch, Carole H Sudre, Laura Acion, Michela Antonelli and 68 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

78 authors.

Annika Reinke
Minu D Tizabi
Michael Baumgartner
Matthias Eisenmann
Doreen Heckmann-Nötzel
A Emre Kavur
Tim Rädsch
Carole H Sudre
Laura Acion
Michela Antonelli
Tal Arbel
Spyridon Bakas
Arriel Benis
Matthew Blaschko
Florian Buettner
M Jorge Cardoso
Veronika Cheplygina
Jianxu Chen
Evangelia Christodoulou
Beth A Cimini
Gary S Collins
Keyvan Farahani
Luciana Ferrer
Adrian Galdran
Bram van Ginneken
Ben Glocker
Patrick Godau
Robert Haase
Daniel A Hashimoto
Michael M Hoffman
Merel Huisman
Fabian Isensee
Pierre Jannin
Charles E Kahn
Dagmar Kainmueller
Bernhard Kainz
Alexandros Karargyris
Alan Karthikesalingam
Hannes Kenngott
Jens Kleesiek
Florian Kofler
Thijs Kooi
Annette Kopp-Schneider
Michal Kozubek
Anna Kreshuk
Tahsin Kurc
Bennett A Landman
Geert Litjens
Amin Madani
Klaus Maier-Hein
Anne L Martel
Peter Mattson
Erik Meijering
Bjoern Menze
Karel G M Moons
Henning Müller
Brennan Nichyporuk
Felix Nickel
Jens Petersen
Susanne M Rafelski
Nasir Rajpoot
Mauricio Reyes
Michael A Riegler
Nicola Rieke
Julio Saez-Rodriguez
Clara I Sánchez
Shravya Shetty
Maarten van Smeden
Ronald M Summers
Abdel A Taha
Aleksei Tiulpin
Sotirios A Tsaftaris
Ben Van Calster
Gaël Varoquaux
Manuel Wiesenfarth
Ziv R Yaniv
Paul F Jäger
Lena Maier-Hein

Funding

Statistical atlases of brain tumor MRI:do imaging phenotypes predict progression?R01NS042645 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI DAVATZIKOS, CHRISTOS · 2002 to 2024
$8.7M
TCIA Sustainment and Scalability - Platforms for Quantitative Imaging Informatics in Precision MedicineU24CA215109 · NCI · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI BANERJEE, IMON, PRIOR, FRED WILLIAM · 2017 to 2021
$8.5M
Center for Open Bioimage AnalysisP41GM135019 · NIGMS · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI CARPENTER, ANNE E. · 2020 to 2024
$6.9M
Tools to Analyze Morphology and Spatially Mapped Molecular DataU24CA180924 · NCI · STATE UNIVERSITY NEW YORK STONY BROOK · PI SALTZ, JOEL H. · 2014 to 2019
$3.6M
Methods and Tools for Integrating Pathomics Data into Cancer RegistriesUH3CA225021 · NCI · STATE UNIVERSITY NEW YORK STONY BROOK · PI CLIFFORD, GARI DAVID, DURBIN, ERIC B. · 2020 to 2022
$1.9M
The Federated Tumor Segmentation (FeTS) platform: An intuitive tool facilitating secure multi-institutional collaborationU01CA242871 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BAKAS, SPYRIDON · 2019 to 2021
$1.1M
EPA EP-W-17-011NCI NIH HHS U01 CA242871NCI NIH HHS U24 CA180924NCI NIH HHS U24 CA215109NCI NIH HHS UH3 CA225021NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM135019NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS042645Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Validation metrics are key for the reliable tracking of scientific progress and for bridging the current chasm between artificial intelligence (AI) research and its translation into practice. However, increasing evidence shows that particularly in image analysis, metrics are often chosen inadequately in relation to the underlying research problem. This could be attributed to a lack of accessibility of metric-related knowledge: While taking into account the individual strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of validation metrics is a critical prerequisite to making educated choices, the relevant knowledge is currently scattered and poorly accessible to individual researchers. Based on a multi-stage Delphi process conducted by a multidisciplinary expert consortium as well as extensive community feedback, the present work provides the first reliable and comprehensive common point of access to information on pitfalls related to validation metrics in image analysis. Focusing on biomedical image analysis but with the potential of transfer to other fields, the addressed pitfalls generalize across application domains and are categorized according to a newly created, domain-agnostic taxonomy. To facilitate comprehension, illustrations and specific examples accompany each pitfall. As a structured body of information accessible to researchers of all levels of expertise, this work enhances global comprehension of a key topic in image analysis validation.

Identifiers

PMID36945687
PMCPMC10029046

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.