Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41726463›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2024

Model Quality in AI-based Bruise Detection: Rethinking IoU and Confidence Thresholds.

Dharmi Desai, Amin Nayebi, Mehrdad Ghyabi, Michał Markiewicz, David Lattanzi, Katherine Scafide, Janusz Wojtusiak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2024. 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

7 authors.

Dharmi DesaiGeorge Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
Amin NayebiGeorge Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
Mehrdad GhyabiGeorge Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
Michał MarkiewiczJagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
David LattanziGeorge Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
Katherine ScafideGeorge Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
Janusz WojtusiakGeorge Mason University, Fairfax, VA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based object detection models, like YOLO and Faster R-CNN, depend heavily on the Intersection over Union (IoU) and confidence thresholds to evaluate model performance. However, fixed thresholds can be biased and may have a disparate effect across subpopulations, even when traditional performance metrics suggest strong model performance. This paper examines how varying IoU and confidence thresholds affect standard evaluation metrics such as precision, recall, F1-score, and mean Average Precision (mAP) along with their effect on five widely used fairness metrics - Demographic Parity, Equalized Odds, Equality of Opportunity, Accuracy Equality, and Disparate Impact. This study evaluated a dataset of bruise images under natural and alternative light sources and found that fairness and performance trade-offs can be mitigated by selecting intermediate threshold values rather than fixed extremes. In addition, the results highlight the need for dynamical optimization of thresholds to achieve both, high model performance and fairness, in AI-driven bruise detection.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDetection AlgorithmsHumans

Identifiers

PMID41726463
PMCPMC12919542

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.