MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389495561 · doi:10.2196/42505

A Biobanking System for Diagnostic Images: Architecture Development, COVID-19–Related Use Cases, and Performance Evaluation

2023· article· en· W4389495561 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giuseppina Esposito, Ciro Allarà, Marco Randon, Marco Aiello, Marco Salvatore, Giuseppe Aceto, Antonio Pescapè

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundEuropean Commission
KeywordsBiobankComputer scienceUploadData collectionPreprintWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Systems capable of automating and enhancing the management of research and clinical data represent a significant contribution of information and communication technologies to health care. A recent advancement is the development of imaging biobanks, which are now enabling the collection and storage of diagnostic images, clinical reports, and demographic data to allow researchers identify associations between lifestyle and genetic factors and imaging-derived phenotypes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to design and evaluate the system performance of a network for an operating biobank of diagnostic images, the Bio Check Up Srl (BCU) Imaging Biobank, based on the Extensible Neuroimaging Archive Toolkit open-source platform. METHODS: Three usage cases were designed focusing on evaluation of the memory and computing consumption during imaging collections upload and during interactions between two kinds of users (researchers and radiologists) who inspect chest computed tomography scans of a COVID-19 cohort. The experiments considered three network setups: (1) a local area network, (2) virtual private network, and (3) wide area network. The experimental setup recorded the activity of a human user interacting with the biobank system, which was continuously replayed multiple times. Several metrics were extracted from network traffic traces and server logs captured during the activity replay. RESULTS: Regarding the diagnostic data transfer, two types of containers were considered: the Web and the Database containers. The Web appeared to be the more memory-hungry container with a higher computational load (average 2.7 GB of RAM) compared to that of the database. With respect to user access, both users demonstrated the same network performance level, although higher resource consumption was registered for two different actions: DOWNLOAD & LOGOUT (100%) for the researcher and OPEN VIEWER (20%-50%) for the radiologist. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that the current setup of BCU Imaging Biobank is well provisioned for satisfying the planned number of concurrent users. More importantly, this study further highlights and quantifies the resource demands of specific user actions, providing a guideline for planning, setting up, and using an image biobanking system.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207