ArticleScientific reports2023
Panoptic quality should be avoided as a metric for assessing cell nuclei segmentation and classification in digital pathology.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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.
- Maximum Matching Accuracy: An Instance Segmentation Evaluation Metric Utilizing Globally Optimal Matching.ArXiv · 2026Article
- Ultrastructural analysis of human uncinate fasciculus with coherent anti-Stokes Raman spectroscopy.Biophotonics discovery · 2026Article
- AI-Assisted Detection and Localization of Spinal Metastatic Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Panoptic Quality (PQ), designed for the task of "Panoptic Segmentation" (PS), has been used in several digital pathology challenges and publications on cell nucleus instance segmentation and classification (ISC) since its introduction in 2019. Its purpose is to encompass the detection and the segmentation aspects of the task in a single measure, so that algorithms can be ranked according to their overall performance. A careful analysis of the properties of the metric, its application to ISC and the characteristics of nucleus ISC datasets, shows that is not suitable for this purpose and should be avoided. Through a theoretical analysis we demonstrate that PS and ISC, despite their similarities, have some fundamental differences that make PQ unsuitable. We also show that the use of the Intersection over Union as a matching rule and as a segmentation quality measure within PQ is not adapted for such small objects as nuclei. We illustrate these findings with examples taken from the NuCLS and MoNuSAC datasets. The code for replicating our results is available on GitHub ( https://github.com/adfoucart/panoptic-quality-suppl ).
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.