Sensitivity of radiomic features to inter-observer variability and image pre-processing in Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) maps of cervix cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aims of this study are to evaluate the stability of radiomic features from Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) maps of cervical cancer with respect to: (1) reproducibility in inter-observer delineation, and (2) image pre-processing (normalization/quantization) prior to feature extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two observers manually delineated the tumor on ADC maps derived from pre-treatment diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance imaging of 81 patients with FIGO stage IB-IVA cervical cancer. First-order, shape, and texture features were extracted from the original and filtered images considering 5 different normalizations (four taken from the available literature, and one based on urine ADC) and two different quantization techniques (fixed-bin widths from 0.05 to 25, and fixed-bin count). Stability of radiomic features was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC): poor (ICC < 0.75); good (0.75 ≤ ICC ≤ 0.89), and excellent (ICC ≥ 0.90). Dependencies of the features with tumor volume were assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient (ρ). RESULTS: The approach using urine-normalized values together with a smaller bin width (0.05) was the most reproducible (428/552, 78% features with ICC ≥ 0.75); the fixed-bin count approach was the least (215/552, 39% with ICC ≥ 0.75). Without normalization, using a fixed bin width of 25, 348/552 (63%) of features had an ICC ≥ 0.75. Overall, 26% (range 25-30%) of the features were volume-dependent (ρ ≥ 0.6). None of the volume-independent shape features were found to be reproducible. CONCLUSION: Applying normalization prior to features extraction increases the reproducibility of ADC-based radiomics features. When normalization is applied, a fixed-bin width approach with smaller widths is suggested.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".