Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39375270›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2025

Deep Conformal Supervision: Leveraging Intermediate Features for Robust Uncertainty Quantification.

Amir M Vahdani, Shahriar Faghani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Amir M VahdaniAdvanced Medical Technologies and Equipment Institute (AMTEI), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6196-1329
Shahriar FaghaniArtificial Intelligence Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. faghani.shahriar@mayo.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3275-2971

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Trustworthiness is crucial for artificial intelligence (AI) models in clinical settings, and a fundamental aspect of trustworthy AI is uncertainty quantification (UQ). Conformal prediction as a robust uncertainty quantification (UQ) framework has been receiving increasing attention as a valuable tool in improving model trustworthiness. An area of active research is the method of non-conformity score calculation for conformal prediction. We propose deep conformal supervision (DCS), which leverages the intermediate outputs of deep supervision for non-conformity score calculation, via weighted averaging based on the inverse of mean calibration error for each stage. We benchmarked our method on two publicly available datasets focused on medical image classification: a pneumonia chest radiography dataset and a preprocessed version of the 2019 RSNA Intracranial Hemorrhage dataset. Our method achieved mean coverage errors of 16e-4 (CI: 1e-4, 41e-4) and 5e-4 (CI: 1e-4, 10e-4) compared to baseline mean coverage errors of 28e-4 (CI: 2e-4, 64e-4) and 21e-4 (CI: 8e-4, 3e-4) on the two datasets, respectively (p < 0.001 on both datasets). Based on our findings, the baseline results of conformal prediction already exhibit small coverage errors. However, our method shows a significant improvement on coverage error, particularly noticeable in scenarios involving smaller datasets or when considering smaller acceptable error levels, which are crucial in developing UQ frameworks for healthcare AI applications.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDeep LearningHumansIntracranial HemorrhagesPneumoniaRadiography, ThoracicUncertaintyClassificationConformal predictionDeep learningDeep supervisionTrustworthy AIUncertainty quantification

Identifiers

PMID39375270
PMCPMC12092326

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.