Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42023068›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2026

Enhancing liver fibrosis measurement: Deep learning and uncertainty analysis across multi-center cohorts.

Marta Wojciechowska, Stefano Malacrino, Dylan Windell, Emma L Culver, Jessica K Dyson, UKAIH consortium, Jens Rittscher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 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

7 authors.

Marta WojciechowskaNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Stefano MalacrinoNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Dylan WindellPerspectum Ltd., Oxford, UK.
Emma L CulverNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jessica K DysonTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University and Liver Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
UKAIH consortium
Jens RittscherNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital pathology enables large multi-center studies of histological specimens, but differences in staining protocols and slide quality can compromise the comparability of quantitative results. We analyzed 686 PicroSirius Red-stained liver biopsies from 4 independent cohorts spanning more than 20 clinical sites to assess how stain variability affects automated fibrosis quantification and model uncertainty. An U-Net ensemble was trained to segment collagen and to estimate pixel- and tile-level predictive uncertainty. Across markedly heterogeneous staining conditions, the ensemble achieved strong segmentation performance (Dice 0.83-0.90) and produced informative uncertainty maps that identified artifacts and out-of-distribution regions. Epistemic uncertainty values were typically below 0.002, providing a practical criterion for flagging unreliable predictions. Our results demonstrate that ensemble-based uncertainty estimation complements stain-standardization efforts by quantifying prediction confidence directly from model outputs, improving the reliability and interpretability of collagen proportionate-area measurements across multi-center datasets. This framework supports more trustworthy and reproducible digital-pathology workflows for fibrosis assessment and other histological applications.

Indexed as

Collagen quantificationCollagen stainingDigital pathologyLiverQuality assuranceUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID42023068
PMCPMC13098447

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.