ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2024
Benefits of spatial uncertainty aggregation for segmentation in digital pathology.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Purpose: Uncertainty estimation has gained significant attention in recent years for its potential to enhance the performance of deep learning (DL) algorithms in medical applications and even potentially address domain shift challenges. However, it is not straightforward to incorporate uncertainty estimation with a DL system to achieve a tangible positive effect. The objective of our work is to evaluate if the proposed spatial uncertainty aggregation (SUA) framework may improve the effectiveness of uncertainty estimation in segmentation tasks. We evaluate if SUA boosts the observed correlation between the uncertainty estimates and false negative (FN) predictions. We also investigate if the observed benefits can translate to tangible improvements in segmentation performance. Approach: Our SUA framework processes negative prediction regions from a segmentation algorithm and detects FNs based on an aggregated uncertainty score. It can be utilized with many existing uncertainty estimation methods to boost their performance. We compare the SUA framework with a baseline of processing individual pixel's uncertainty independently. Results: The results demonstrate that SUA is able to detect FN regions. It achieved Conclusions: We propose the SUA framework for incorporating and utilizing uncertainty estimates for FN detection in DL segmentation algorithms for histopathology. The evaluation confirms the benefits of our approach compared with assessing pixel uncertainty independently.
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.