医学图像分割中不确定度估计方法的评价:探索不确定度在临床部署中的应用

IF 5.4 2区 医学 Q1 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Shiman Li , Mingzhi Yuan , Xiaokun Dai , Chenxi Zhang
{"title":"医学图像分割中不确定度估计方法的评价:探索不确定度在临床部署中的应用","authors":"Shiman Li ,&nbsp;Mingzhi Yuan ,&nbsp;Xiaokun Dai ,&nbsp;Chenxi Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.compmedimag.2025.102574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Uncertainty estimation methods are essential for the application of artificial intelligence (AI) models in medical image segmentation, particularly in addressing reliability and feasibility challenges in clinical deployment. Despite their significance, the adoption of uncertainty estimation methods in clinical practice remains limited due to the lack of a comprehensive evaluation framework tailored to their clinical usage. To address this gap, a simulation of uncertainty-assisted clinical workflows is conducted, highlighting the roles of uncertainty in model selection, sample screening, and risk visualization. Furthermore, uncertainty evaluation is extended to pixel, sample, and model levels to enable a more thorough assessment. At the pixel level, the Uncertainty Confusion Metric (UCM) is proposed, utilizing density curves to improve robustness against variability in uncertainty distributions and to assess the ability of pixel uncertainty to identify potential errors. At the sample level, the Expected Segmentation Calibration Error (ESCE) is introduced to provide more accurate calibration aligned with Dice, enabling more effective identification of low-quality samples. At the model level, the Harmonic Dice (HDice) metric is developed to integrate uncertainty and accuracy, mitigating the influence of dataset biases and offering a more robust evaluation of model performance on unseen data. Using this systematic evaluation framework, five mainstream uncertainty estimation methods are compared on organ and tumor datasets, providing new insights into their clinical applicability. Extensive experimental analyses validated the practicality and effectiveness of the proposed metrics. This study offers clear guidance for selecting appropriate uncertainty estimation methods in clinical settings, facilitating their integration into clinical workflows and ultimately improving diagnostic efficiency and patient outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50631,"journal":{"name":"Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102574"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of uncertainty estimation methods in medical image segmentation: Exploring the usage of uncertainty in clinical deployment\",\"authors\":\"Shiman Li ,&nbsp;Mingzhi Yuan ,&nbsp;Xiaokun Dai ,&nbsp;Chenxi Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.compmedimag.2025.102574\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Uncertainty estimation methods are essential for the application of artificial intelligence (AI) models in medical image segmentation, particularly in addressing reliability and feasibility challenges in clinical deployment. Despite their significance, the adoption of uncertainty estimation methods in clinical practice remains limited due to the lack of a comprehensive evaluation framework tailored to their clinical usage. To address this gap, a simulation of uncertainty-assisted clinical workflows is conducted, highlighting the roles of uncertainty in model selection, sample screening, and risk visualization. Furthermore, uncertainty evaluation is extended to pixel, sample, and model levels to enable a more thorough assessment. At the pixel level, the Uncertainty Confusion Metric (UCM) is proposed, utilizing density curves to improve robustness against variability in uncertainty distributions and to assess the ability of pixel uncertainty to identify potential errors. At the sample level, the Expected Segmentation Calibration Error (ESCE) is introduced to provide more accurate calibration aligned with Dice, enabling more effective identification of low-quality samples. At the model level, the Harmonic Dice (HDice) metric is developed to integrate uncertainty and accuracy, mitigating the influence of dataset biases and offering a more robust evaluation of model performance on unseen data. Using this systematic evaluation framework, five mainstream uncertainty estimation methods are compared on organ and tumor datasets, providing new insights into their clinical applicability. Extensive experimental analyses validated the practicality and effectiveness of the proposed metrics. This study offers clear guidance for selecting appropriate uncertainty estimation methods in clinical settings, facilitating their integration into clinical workflows and ultimately improving diagnostic efficiency and patient outcomes.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics\",\"volume\":\"124 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102574\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895611125000837\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895611125000837","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

不确定性估计方法对于人工智能(AI)模型在医学图像分割中的应用至关重要,特别是在解决临床部署中的可靠性和可行性挑战方面。尽管不确定性估计方法具有重要意义,但由于缺乏针对其临床使用的综合评估框架,不确定性估计方法在临床实践中的采用仍然有限。为了解决这一差距,进行了不确定性辅助临床工作流程的模拟,突出了不确定性在模型选择,样本筛选和风险可视化中的作用。此外,不确定性评估被扩展到像素、样本和模型水平,以实现更彻底的评估。在像素级,提出了不确定性混淆度量(UCM),利用密度曲线提高对不确定性分布变异性的鲁棒性,并评估像素不确定性识别潜在错误的能力。在样本水平上,引入了期望分割校准误差(ESCE),以提供与Dice对齐的更准确的校准,从而更有效地识别低质量样本。在模型层面,开发了谐波骰子(HDice)度量来整合不确定性和准确性,减轻数据集偏差的影响,并对未见数据的模型性能提供更稳健的评估。利用该系统评估框架,比较了五种主流不确定性估计方法在器官和肿瘤数据集上的应用,为其临床适用性提供了新的见解。广泛的实验分析验证了所提出指标的实用性和有效性。本研究为临床环境中选择合适的不确定性评估方法,促进其融入临床工作流程,最终提高诊断效率和患者预后提供了明确的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of uncertainty estimation methods in medical image segmentation: Exploring the usage of uncertainty in clinical deployment
Uncertainty estimation methods are essential for the application of artificial intelligence (AI) models in medical image segmentation, particularly in addressing reliability and feasibility challenges in clinical deployment. Despite their significance, the adoption of uncertainty estimation methods in clinical practice remains limited due to the lack of a comprehensive evaluation framework tailored to their clinical usage. To address this gap, a simulation of uncertainty-assisted clinical workflows is conducted, highlighting the roles of uncertainty in model selection, sample screening, and risk visualization. Furthermore, uncertainty evaluation is extended to pixel, sample, and model levels to enable a more thorough assessment. At the pixel level, the Uncertainty Confusion Metric (UCM) is proposed, utilizing density curves to improve robustness against variability in uncertainty distributions and to assess the ability of pixel uncertainty to identify potential errors. At the sample level, the Expected Segmentation Calibration Error (ESCE) is introduced to provide more accurate calibration aligned with Dice, enabling more effective identification of low-quality samples. At the model level, the Harmonic Dice (HDice) metric is developed to integrate uncertainty and accuracy, mitigating the influence of dataset biases and offering a more robust evaluation of model performance on unseen data. Using this systematic evaluation framework, five mainstream uncertainty estimation methods are compared on organ and tumor datasets, providing new insights into their clinical applicability. Extensive experimental analyses validated the practicality and effectiveness of the proposed metrics. This study offers clear guidance for selecting appropriate uncertainty estimation methods in clinical settings, facilitating their integration into clinical workflows and ultimately improving diagnostic efficiency and patient outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
3.50%
发文量
71
审稿时长
26 days
期刊介绍: The purpose of the journal Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics is to act as a source for the exchange of research results concerning algorithmic advances, development, and application of digital imaging in disease detection, diagnosis, intervention, prevention, precision medicine, and population health. Included in the journal will be articles on novel computerized imaging or visualization techniques, including artificial intelligence and machine learning, augmented reality for surgical planning and guidance, big biomedical data visualization, computer-aided diagnosis, computerized-robotic surgery, image-guided therapy, imaging scanning and reconstruction, mobile and tele-imaging, radiomics, and imaging integration and modeling with other information relevant to digital health. The types of biomedical imaging include: magnetic resonance, computed tomography, ultrasound, nuclear medicine, X-ray, microwave, optical and multi-photon microscopy, video and sensory imaging, and the convergence of biomedical images with other non-imaging datasets.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信