Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37529208›Full record

ReviewRadiology. Artificial intelligence2023

A Guide to Cross-Validation for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging.

Tyler J Bradshaw, Zachary Huemann, Junjie Hu, Arman Rahmim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Radiology. Artificial intelligence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 122 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
122citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

122 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Cough biomarkers for diagnosis and monitoring of respiratory disease: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

62 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tyler J BradshawFrom the Departments of Radiology (T.J.B., Z.H.) and Biostatistics and Computer Science (J.H.), University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Departments of Radiology and Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R.); and Department of Integrative Oncology, BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R).ORCID 0000-0001-9549-7002
Zachary HuemannFrom the Departments of Radiology (T.J.B., Z.H.) and Biostatistics and Computer Science (J.H.), University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Departments of Radiology and Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R.); and Department of Integrative Oncology, BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R).ORCID 0000-0002-1472-243X
Junjie HuFrom the Departments of Radiology (T.J.B., Z.H.) and Biostatistics and Computer Science (J.H.), University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Departments of Radiology and Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R.); and Department of Integrative Oncology, BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R).ORCID 0000-0001-7137-7719
Arman RahmimFrom the Departments of Radiology (T.J.B., Z.H.) and Biostatistics and Computer Science (J.H.), University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Departments of Radiology and Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R.); and Department of Integrative Oncology, BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (A.R).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is being increasingly used to automate and improve technologies within the field of medical imaging. A critical step in the development of an AI algorithm is estimating its prediction error through cross-validation (CV). The use of CV can help prevent overoptimism in AI algorithms and can mitigate certain biases associated with hyperparameter tuning and algorithm selection. This article introduces the principles of CV and provides a practical guide on the use of CV for AI algorithm development in medical imaging. Different CV techniques are described, as well as their advantages and disadvantages under different scenarios. Common pitfalls in prediction error estimation and guidance on how to avoid them are also discussed.

Indexed as

Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)EducationResearch DesignStatisticsSupervised LearningTechnical Aspects

Identifiers

PMID37529208
PMCPMC10388213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.