Impact of Field-of-view Zooming and Segmentation Batches on Radiomics Features Reproducibility and Machine Learning Performance in Thyroid Scintigraphy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thyroid diseases are the second most common hormonal disorders, necessitating accurate diagnostics. Advances in artificial intelligence and radiomics have enhanced diagnostic precision by analyzing quantitative imaging features. However, reproducibility challenges arising from factors such as the field-of-view (FOV) zooming and segmentation variability limit the clinical application of radiomic-based models. AIM: This study focuses on evaluating the impact of segmentation and FOV zooming on the reproducibility of radiomic features and improved performance of machine learning (ML) when using reproducible features for classification of thyroid scintigraphy images into normal, diffuse goiter (DG), multinodular goiter (MNG), and thyroiditis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 872 thyroid scintigraphy cases from 3 centers. Radiomic feature reproducibility was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), with robust features (ICC≥0.80) identified under segmentation and zooming conditions. Four ML training scenarios were implemented to train models on Center A data, including (1) all, (2) zoom-robust, (3) segmentation-robust, and (4) mutually robust features, with 3 feature selection methods and 7 classifiers. Models were validated on external data sets (centers B and C). RESULTS: FOV zooming significantly reduced feature reproducibility (ICC≥0.80: 49%), while segmentation effects were minimal (ICC≥0.80: 96%). Models trained on mutually robust features outperformed those trained using all features. Boruta-MLP achieved the highest accuracy (0.71, P -value <0.001 vs. all features) in zoomed data sets, and RFE-MLP performed best (0.69, P -value <0.001 vs. all features) in the baseline data set, with Gray-Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM) features frequently selected. CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing robust radiomic features significantly improved the performance of ML models in thyroid disease classification, enabling more accurate and generalizable diagnostic outcomes across diverse data sets.
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 | 0.012 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".