MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412939140 · doi:10.1186/s12880-025-01855-2

Open-radiomics: a collection of standardized datasets and a technical protocol for reproducible radiomics machine learning pipelines

2025· article· en· W4412939140 on OpenAlexafffund
Khashayar Namdar, Matthias Wagner, Birgit Ertl‐Wagner, Farzad Khalvati

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationVector InstituteMental Health Research CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRadiomicsComputer scienceProtocol (science)Pipeline transportOpen sourceMedical physicsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMedicineSoftwareOperating systemEngineeringPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As an important branch of machine learning pipelines in medical imaging, radiomics faces two major challenges namely reproducibility and accessibility. In this work, we introduce open-radiomics, a set of radiomics datasets along with a comprehensive radiomics pipeline based on our proposed technical protocol to investigate the effects of radiomics feature extraction on the reproducibility of the results. METHODS: We curated large-scale radiomics datasets based on three open-source datasets; BraTS 2020 for high-grade glioma (HGG) versus low-grade glioma (LGG) classification and survival analysis, BraTS 2023 for O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) classification, and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survival analysis from the Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA). We used the BraTS 2020 open-source Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) dataset to demonstrate how our proposed technical protocol could be utilized in radiomics-based studies. The cohort includes 369 adult patients with brain tumors (76 LGG, and 293 HGG). Using PyRadiomics library for LGG vs. HGG classification, we created 288 radiomics datasets; the combinations of 4 MRI sequences, 3 binWidths, 6 image normalization methods, and 4 tumor subregions. We used Random Forest classifiers, and for each radiomics dataset, we repeated the training-validation-test (60%/20%/20%) experiment with different data splits and model random states 100 times (28,800 test results) and calculated the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Unlike binWidth and image normalization, the tumor subregion and imaging sequence significantly affected performance of the models. T1 contrast-enhanced sequence and the union of Necrotic and the non-enhancing tumor core subregions resulted in the highest AUROCs (average test AUROC 0.951, 95% confidence interval of (0.949, 0.952)). Although several settings and data splits (28 out of 28800) yielded test AUROC of 1, they were irreproducible. CONCLUSIONS: Our experiments demonstrate the sources of variability in radiomics pipelines (e.g., tumor subregion) can have a significant impact on the results, which may lead to superficial perfect performances that are irreproducible. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.019

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.363 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReproducibility
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical ImagingSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207