Med-ImageTools: An open-source Python package for robust data processing pipelines and curating medical imaging data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Machine learning and AI promise to revolutionize the way we leverage medical imaging data for improving care but require large datasets to train computational models that can be implemented in clinical practice. However, processing large and complex medical imaging datasets remains an open challenge. Methods: To address this issue, we developed Med-ImageTools, a new Python open-source software package to automate data curation and processing while allowing researchers to share their data processing configurations more easily, lowering the barrier for other researchers to reproduce published works. Use cases: We have demonstrated the efficiency of Med-ImageTools across three different datasets, resulting in significantly reduced processing times. Conclusions: The AutoPipeline feature will improve the accessibility of raw clinical datasets on public archives, such as the Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA), the largest public repository of cancer imaging, allowing machine learning researchers to process analysis-ready formats without requiring deep domain knowledge.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Software About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Software About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.024 | 0.140 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".