ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2025
Improving annotation efficiency for fully labeling a breast mass segmentation dataset.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Breast cancer remains a leading cause of death for women. Screening programs are deployed to detect cancer at early stages. One current barrier identified by breast imaging researchers is a shortage of labeled image datasets. Addressing this problem is crucial to improve early detection models. We present an active learning (AL) framework for segmenting breast masses from 2D digital mammography, and we publish labeled data. Our method aims to reduce the input needed from expert annotators to reach a fully labeled dataset. Approach: We create a dataset of 1136 mammographic masses with pixel-wise binary segmentation labels, with the test subset labeled independently by two different teams. With this dataset, we simulate a human annotator within an AL framework to develop and compare AI-assisted labeling methods, using a discriminator model and a simulated oracle to collect acceptable segmentation labels. A UNet model is retrained on these labels, generating new segmentations. We evaluate various oracle heuristics using the percentage of segmentations that the oracle relabels and measure the quality of the proposed labels by evaluating the intersection over union over a validation dataset. Results: Our method reduces expert annotator input by 44%. We present a dataset of 1136 binary segmentation labels approved by board-certified radiologists and make the 143-image validation set public for comparison with other researchers' methods. Conclusions: We demonstrate that AL can significantly improve the efficiency and time-effectiveness of creating labeled mammogram datasets. Our framework facilitates the development of high-quality datasets while minimizing manual effort in the domain of digital mammography.
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.