ArticleMedical image analysis2023
USE-Evaluator: Performance metrics for medical image segmentation models supervised by uncertain, small or empty reference annotations in neuroimaging.
Article in Medical image analysis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Deep learning for MRI-based acute and subacute ischaemic stroke lesion segmentation-a systematic review, meta-analysis, and pilot evaluation of key results.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Evaluation of an AI-based segmentation model for mandibular fracture segmentation on CBCT using volumetric and 2D slice-based validation approaches.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Foreign Body Response to Neuroimplantation: Machine Learning-Assisted Quantitative Analysis of Astrogliosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- A deep learning-based model for postoperative resection assessment in glioblastoma: A comparative study.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- Point cloud registration algorithm using liver vascular skeleton feature with computed tomography and ultrasonography image fusion.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
- ECP-GAN: Generating Endometrial Cancer Pathology Images and Segmentation Labels via Two-Stage Generative Adversarial Networks.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- DDANet: A deep dilated attention network for intracerebral haemorrhage segmentation.IET systems biology · 2024Article
- Segmentation and multiparametric evaluation of corneal whorl-like nerves for in vivo confocal microscopy images in dry eye disease.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2024Article
- An Analysis of Loss Functions for Heavily Imbalanced Lesion Segmentation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Random expert sampling for deep learning segmentation of acute ischemic stroke on non-contrast CT.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2024Article
- Deep Learned Segmentations of Inflammation for Novel ⁹⁹Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Non-inferiority of deep learning ischemic stroke segmentation on non-contrast CT within 16-hours compared to expert neuroradiologists.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Deep learning-based postoperative glioblastoma segmentation and extent of resection evaluation: Development, external validation, and model comparison.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Performance metrics for medical image segmentation models are used to measure the agreement between the reference annotation and the predicted segmentation. Usually, overlap metrics, such as the Dice, are used as a metric to evaluate the performance of these models in order for results to be comparable. However, there is a mismatch between the distributions of cases and the difficulty level of segmentation tasks in public data sets compared to clinical practice. Common metrics used to assess performance fail to capture the impact of this mismatch, particularly when dealing with datasets in clinical settings that involve challenging segmentation tasks, pathologies with low signal, and reference annotations that are uncertain, small, or empty. Limitations of common metrics may result in ineffective machine learning research in designing and optimizing models. To effectively evaluate the clinical value of such models, it is essential to consider factors such as the uncertainty associated with reference annotations, the ability to accurately measure performance regardless of the size of the reference annotation volume, and the classification of cases where reference annotations are empty. We study how uncertain, small, and empty reference annotations influence the value of metrics on a stroke in-house data set regardless of the model. We examine metrics behavior on the predictions of a standard deep learning framework in order to identify suitable metrics in such a setting. We compare our results to the BRATS 2019 and Spinal Cord public data sets. We show how uncertain, small, or empty reference annotations require a rethinking of the evaluation. The evaluation code was released to encourage further analysis of this topic https://github.com/SophieOstmeier/UncertainSmallEmpty.git.
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.