Literature DB >> 36204539

Mitigating Bias in Radiology Machine Learning: 3. Performance Metrics.

Shahriar Faghani1, Bardia Khosravi1, Kuan Zhang1, Mana Moassefi1, Jaidip Manikrao Jagtap1, Fred Nugen1, Sanaz Vahdati1, Shiba P Kuanar1, Seyed Moein Rassoulinejad-Mousavi1, Yashbir Singh1, Diana V Vera Garcia1, Pouria Rouzrokh1, Bradley J Erickson1.   

Abstract

The increasing use of machine learning (ML) algorithms in clinical settings raises concerns about bias in ML models. Bias can arise at any step of ML creation, including data handling, model development, and performance evaluation. Potential biases in the ML model can be minimized by implementing these steps correctly. This report focuses on performance evaluation and discusses model fitness, as well as a set of performance evaluation toolboxes: namely, performance metrics, performance interpretation maps, and uncertainty quantification. By discussing the strengths and limitations of each toolbox, our report highlights strategies and considerations to mitigate and detect biases during performance evaluations of radiology artificial intelligence models. Keywords: Segmentation, Diagnosis, Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) © RSNA, 2022.
© 2022 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Convolutional Neural Network (CNN); Diagnosis; Segmentation

Year:  2022        PMID: 36204539      PMCID: PMC9530766          DOI: 10.1148/ryai.220061

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Artif Intell        ISSN: 2638-6100


  31 in total

1.  Chest Radiographs in Congestive Heart Failure: Visualizing Neural Network Learning.

Authors:  Jarrel C Y Seah; Jennifer S N Tang; Andy Kitchen; Frank Gaillard; Andrew F Dixon
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Clinical Decision Support in the Era of Artificial Intelligence.

Authors:  Edward H Shortliffe; Martin J Sepúlveda
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Optimization for Medical Image Segmentation: Theory and Practice When Evaluating With Dice Score or Jaccard Index.

Authors:  Tom Eelbode; Jeroen Bertels; Maxim Berman; Dirk Vandermeulen; Frederik Maes; Raf Bisschops; Matthew B Blaschko
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 10.048

4.  Assessing the Trustworthiness of Saliency Maps for Localizing Abnormalities in Medical Imaging.

Authors:  Nishanth Arun; Nathan Gaw; Praveer Singh; Ken Chang; Mehak Aggarwal; Bryan Chen; Katharina Hoebel; Sharut Gupta; Jay Patel; Mishka Gidwani; Julius Adebayo; Matthew D Li; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer
Journal:  Radiol Artif Intell       Date:  2021-10-06

5.  A deep learning model for discriminating true progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients.

Authors:  Mana Moassefi; Shahriar Faghani; Gian Marco Conte; Roman O Kowalchuk; Sanaz Vahdati; David J Crompton; Carlos Perez-Vega; Ricardo A Domingo Cabreja; Sujay A Vora; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa; Ian F Parney; Daniel M Trifiletti; Bradley J Erickson
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 4.506

6.  Stop Explaining Black Box Machine Learning Models for High Stakes Decisions and Use Interpretable Models Instead.

Authors:  Cynthia Rudin
Journal:  Nat Mach Intell       Date:  2019-05-13

7.  Trust in artificial intelligence for medical diagnoses.

Authors:  Georgiana Juravle; Andriana Boudouraki; Miglena Terziyska; Constantin Rezlescu
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2020-07-02       Impact factor: 2.453

8.  SOUP-GAN: Super-Resolution MRI Using Generative Adversarial Networks.

Authors:  Kuan Zhang; Haoji Hu; Kenneth Philbrick; Gian Marco Conte; Joseph D Sobek; Pouria Rouzrokh; Bradley J Erickson
Journal:  Tomography       Date:  2022-03-24

Review 9.  Interpretation and visualization techniques for deep learning models in medical imaging.

Authors:  Daniel T Huff; Amy J Weisman; Robert Jeraj
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-02-02       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.