Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41513702›Full record

ArticleScientific data2026

A MultiRater MultiOrgan Abdominal CT Dataset for Calibration Analysis and Uncertainty Modeling in Segmentation.

Meritxell Riera-Marin, Joy-Marie Kleiss, Anton Aubanell, Andreu Antolin, Juan Moreno-Vedia, Julia Rodriguez-Comas, Sikha O K, Matthias May, Javier Garcia-Lopez, Adrian Galdran and 1 more

Abstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Meritxell Riera-MarinSycai Technologies SL, Scientific and Technical Department, Barcelona, 08018, Spain. m.riera@sycaitechnologies.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6221-5443
Joy-Marie KleissUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen, Department of Radiology of the Uniklinikum Erlangen (UKER), Erlangen, 91054, Germany.
Anton AubanellHospital de Sant Pau i la Santa Creu, Diagnostic Imaging Department, Barcelona, 08025, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3511-6025
Andreu AntolinHospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Department of Radiology, Institut de Diagnòstic per la Imatge (IDI), Barcelona, 08035, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6973-4246
Juan Moreno-VediaSycai Technologies SL, Scientific and Technical Department, Barcelona, 08018, Spain.
Julia Rodriguez-ComasSycai Technologies SL, Scientific and Technical Department, Barcelona, 08018, Spain.
Sikha O KUniversitat Pompeu Fabra, BCN Medtech, Department of Engineering, Barcelona, 08018, Spain.
Matthias MayUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen, Department of Radiology of the Uniklinikum Erlangen (UKER), Erlangen, 91054, Germany.
Javier Garcia-LopezSycai Technologies SL, Scientific and Technical Department, Barcelona, 08018, Spain.
Adrian GaldranTecnalia Research and Innovation (Tecnalia), Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Bizkaia, 48160, Spain.
Miguel A González BallesterUniversitat Pompeu Fabra, BCN Medtech, Department of Engineering, Barcelona, 08018, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9227-6826

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In medical imaging, deep learning (DL) models often struggle to delineate ambiguous structures such as tumors or organ boundaries, leading to uncertainty in defining precise contours. This challenge is amplified by inter-rater variability, where experts may disagree on boundary delineations, resulting in inconsistent segmentation outcomes. Addressing these issues requires robust algorithms capable of quantifying uncertainty, standardizing annotation practices, and improving calibration to ensure reliable predictions, particularly in multi-class and multi-rater scenarios. When models are miscalibrated and overconfident, their outputs can mislead clinical decision-making, potentially influencing radiologists to over- or under-estimate malignancy risks. The CURVAS challenge (Calibration and Uncertainty for multiRater Volume Assessment in multiorgan Segmentation) was established to address these challenges by jointly assessing uncertainty, calibration, and segmentation quality, as well as promoting clinical relevance by evaluating organ volumes while accounting for annotation variability. To support this, a dataset of 90 contrast-enhanced CT scans from University Hospital Erlangen was curated, containing pancreas, liver, and kidney segmentations annotated by three experts. This resource provides a foundation for developing and benchmarking algorithms that balance segmentation accuracy, calibration, and reliability. A quantitative analysis of the annotations shows that kidney and liver segmentations exhibit strong consistency, whereas the pancreas remains challenging, emphasizing the need for refined labeling protocols and improved training strategies.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedAlgorithmsCalibrationDeep LearningHumansKidneyLiverPancreasUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID41513702
PMCPMC12873139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.