MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408984064 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-94806-4

Multimodal contrastive learning for enhanced explainability in pediatric brain tumor molecular diagnosis

2025· article· en· W4408984064 on OpenAlexafffund
Sara Ketabi, Matthias Wagner, Cynthia Hawkins, Uri Tabori, Birgit Ertl‐Wagner, Farzad Khalvati

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceMedicineNeuroscienceBioinformaticsPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the promising performance of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in brain tumor diagnosis from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), their integration into the clinical workflow has been limited. That is mainly due to the fact that the features contributing to a model's prediction are unclear to radiologists and hence, clinically irrelevant, i.e., lack of explainability. As the invaluable sources of radiologists' knowledge and expertise, radiology reports can be integrated with MRI in a contrastive learning (CL) framework, enabling learning from image-report associations, to improve CNN explainability. In this work, we train a multimodal CL architecture on 3D brain MRI scans and radiology reports to learn informative MRI representations. Furthermore, we integrate tumor location, salient to several brain tumor analysis tasks, into this framework to improve its generalizability. We then apply the learnt image representations to improve explainability and performance of genetic marker classification of pediatric Low-grade Glioma, the most prevalent brain tumor in children, as a downstream task. Our results indicate a Dice score of 31.1% between the model's attention maps and manual tumor segmentation (as an explainability measure) with test classification performance of 87.7%, significantly outperforming the baselines. These enhancements can build trust in our model among radiologists, facilitating its integration into clinical practices for more efficient tumor diagnosis.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207