Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41866425›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Validation of conformal prediction in cervical atypia classification.

Misgina Tsighe Hagos, Antti Suutala, Dmitrii Bychkov, Hakan Kücükel, Joar von Bahr, Milda Poceviciute, Johan Lundin, Nina Linder, Claes Lundström

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

9 authors.

Misgina Tsighe HagosDepartment of Science and Technology, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden. misgina.tsighe.hagos@liu.se.
Antti SuutalaInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland - FIMM, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Dmitrii BychkovInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland - FIMM, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Hakan KücükelInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland - FIMM, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Joar von BahrInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland - FIMM, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Milda PoceviciuteDepartment of Science and Technology, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden.
Johan LundinInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland - FIMM, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Nina LinderInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland - FIMM, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Claes LundströmDepartment of Science and Technology, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning based cervical cancer classification can potentially increase access to screening in low-resource regions. However, deep learning models are often overconfident and do not reliably reflect diagnostic uncertainty. Moreover, they are typically optimized to generate maximum-likelihood predictions, which fail to convey uncertainty or ambiguity in their results. Such challenges can be addressed using conformal prediction, a model-agnostic framework for generating prediction sets that contain likely classes for trained deep-learning models. The size of these prediction sets indicates model uncertainty, contracting as model confidence increases. However, existing validation of conformal prediction primarily focuses on whether the prediction set includes or covers the true class, often overlooking the presence of extraneous classes. We argue that prediction sets should be truthful and valuable to end users, ensuring that the listed likely classes align with human expectations rather than being overly relaxed and including false positives or unlikely classes. In this study, we comprehensively validate conformal prediction sets using expert annotation sets collected from multiple annotators. We evaluate three conformal prediction approaches applied to three deep-learning models trained for cervical atypia classification. Our expert annotation-based analysis reveals that conventional coverage-based validations overestimate performance and that current conformal prediction methods often produce prediction sets that are not well aligned with human labels. Additionally, we explore the capabilities of the conformal prediction methods in identifying ambiguous and out-of-distribution data.

Indexed as

Cervix UteriDeep LearningUterine Cervical NeoplasmsClassification AlgorithmsFemaleHumansPrediction Algorithms

Identifiers

PMID41866425
PMCPMC13009466

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.