Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38285380›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2024

Surgical phase and instrument recognition: how to identify appropriate dataset splits.

Georgii Kostiuchik, Lalith Sharan, Benedikt Mayer, Ivo Wolf, Bernhard Preim, Sandy Engelhardt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

6 authors.

Georgii KostiuchikDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. georgii.kostiuchik@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-5907-9839
Lalith SharanDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0835-042X
Benedikt MayerDepartment of Simulation and Graphics, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3450-9556
Ivo WolfDepartment of Computer Science, Mannheim University of Applied Sciences, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6519-6484
Bernhard PreimDepartment of Simulation and Graphics, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9826-9478
Sandy EngelhardtDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8816-7654

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMachine learning approaches can only be reliably evaluated if training, validation, and test data splits are representative and not affected by the absence of classes. Surgical workflow and instrument recognition are two tasks that are complicated in this manner, because of heavy data imbalances resulting from different length of phases and their potential erratic occurrences. Furthermore, sub-properties like instrument (co-)occurrence are usually not particularly considered when defining the split.

methodsWe present a publicly available data visualization tool that enables interactive exploration of dataset partitions for surgical phase and instrument recognition. The application focuses on the visualization of the occurrence of phases, phase transitions, instruments, and instrument combinations across sets. Particularly, it facilitates assessment of dataset splits, especially regarding identification of sub-optimal dataset splits.

resultsWe performed analysis of the datasets Cholec80, CATARACTS, CaDIS, M2CAI-workflow, and M2CAI-tool using the proposed application. We were able to uncover phase transitions, individual instruments, and combinations of surgical instruments that were not represented in one of the sets. Addressing these issues, we identify possible improvements in the splits using our tool. A user study with ten participants demonstrated that the participants were able to successfully solve a selection of data exploration tasks.

conclusionIn highly unbalanced class distributions, special care should be taken with respect to the selection of an appropriate dataset split because it can greatly influence the assessments of machine learning approaches. Our interactive tool allows for determination of better splits to improve current practices in the field. The live application is available at https://cardio-ai.github.io/endovis-ml/ .

Indexed as

Machine LearningSurgical InstrumentsHumansWorkflowData visualizationInstrument detectionSurgical data scienceSurgical workflow recognition

Identifiers

PMID38285380
PMCPMC10973055

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.