Summary of the National Cancer Institute 2023 Virtual Workshop on Medical Image De-identification—Part 1: Report of the MIDI Task Group - Best Practices and Recommendations, Tools for Conventional Approaches to De-identification, International Approaches to De-identification, and Industry Panel on Image De-identification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
De-identification of medical images intended for research is a core requirement for data-sharing initiatives, particularly as the demand for data for artificial intelligence (AI) applications grows. The Center for Biomedical Informatics and Information Technology (CBIIT) of the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) convened a virtual workshop with the intent of summarizing the state of the art in de-identification technology and processes and exploring interesting aspects of the subject. This paper summarizes the highlights of the first day of the workshop, the recordings, and presentations of which are publicly available for review. The topics covered included the report of the Medical Image De-Identification Initiative (MIDI) Task Group on best practices and recommendations, tools for conventional approaches to de-identification, international approaches to de-identification, and an industry panel.
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 | 0.015 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.014 |
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".