MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203233031 · doi:10.1002/jmri.27908

Deep Generative Medical Image Harmonization for Improving Cross‐Site Generalization in Deep Learning Predictors

2021· article· en· W3203233031 on OpenAlexaff
Vishnu Bashyam, Jimit Doshi, Güray Erus, Dhivya Srinivasan, Ahmed Abdulkadir, Ashish Singh, Mohamad Habes, Yong Fan, Colin L. Masters, Paul Maruff, Chuanjun Zhuo, Henry Völzke, Sterling C. Johnson, Jürgen Fripp, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, Theodore D. Satterthwaite, Daniel H. Wolf, Raquel E. Gur, Ruben C. Gur, John C. Morris, Marilyn S. Albert, Hans J. Grabe, Susan M. Resnick, Nick Bryan, Katharina Wittfeld, Robin Bülow, David A. Wolk, Haochang Shou, Ilya M. Nasrallah, Christos Davatzikos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringMinistry of Cultural AffairsUniversität GreifswaldBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNational Institute on AgingSiemens HealthineersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryArtificial intelligenceDeep learningOverfittingComputer scienceNeuroimagingGeneralizationMachine learningHarmonizationPattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsArtificial neural networkMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the medical imaging domain, deep learning-based methods have yet to see widespread clinical adoption, in part due to limited generalization performance across different imaging devices and acquisition protocols. The deviation between estimated brain age and biological age is an established biomarker of brain health and such models may benefit from increased cross-site generalizability. PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a deep learning-based image harmonization method to improve cross-site generalizability of deep learning age prediction. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: Eight thousand eight hundred and seventy-six subjects from six sites. Harmonization models were trained using all subjects. Age prediction models were trained using 2739 subjects from a single site and tested using the remaining 6137 subjects from various other sites. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Brain imaging with magnetization prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo or spoiled gradient echo sequences at 1.5 T and 3 T. ASSESSMENT: StarGAN v2, was used to perform a canonical mapping from diverse datasets to a reference domain to reduce site-based variation while preserving semantic information. Generalization performance of deep learning age prediction was evaluated using harmonized, histogram matched, and unharmonized data. STATISTICAL TESTS: Mean absolute error (MAE) and Pearson correlation between estimated age and biological age quantified the performance of the age prediction model. RESULTS: Our results indicated a substantial improvement in age prediction in out-of-sample data, with the overall MAE improving from 15.81 (±0.21) years to 11.86 (±0.11) with histogram matching to 7.21 (±0.22) years with generative adversarial network (GAN)-based harmonization. In the multisite case, across the 5 out-of-sample sites, MAE improved from 9.78 (±6.69) years to 7.74 (±3.03) years with histogram normalization to 5.32 (±4.07) years with GAN-based harmonization. DATA CONCLUSION: While further research is needed, GAN-based medical image harmonization appears to be a promising tool for improving cross-site deep learning generalization. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations84
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207