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 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 | 0.014 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".