Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation.

Validation metrics are key for tracking scientific progress and bridging the current chasm between artificial intelligence research and its translation into practice. However, increasing evidence shows that, particularly in image analysis, metrics are often chosen inadequately. Although taking into account the individual strengths, weaknesses and limitations of validation metrics is a critical prerequisite to making educated choices, the relevant knowledge is currently scattered and poorly accessible to individual researchers. Based on a multistage Delphi process conducted by a multidisciplinary expert consortium as well as extensive community feedback, the present work provides a reliable and comprehensive common point of access to information on pitfalls related to validation metrics in image analysis. Although focused on biomedical image analysis, the addressed pitfalls generalize across application domains and are categorized according to a newly created, domain-agnostic taxonomy. The work serves to enhance global comprehension of a key topic in image analysis validation.

Metrics reloaded: recommendations for image analysis validation.

Increasing evidence shows that flaws in machine learning (ML) algorithm validation are an underestimated global problem. In biomedical image analysis, chosen performance metrics often do not reflect the domain interest, and thus fail to adequately measure scientific progress and hinder translation of ML techniques into practice. To overcome this, we created Metrics Reloaded, a comprehensive framework guiding researchers in the problem-aware selection of metrics. Developed by a large international consortium in a multistage Delphi process, it is based on the novel concept of a problem fingerprint-a structured representation of the given problem that captures all aspects that are relevant for metric selection, from the domain interest to the properties of the target structure(s), dataset and algorithm output. On the basis of the problem fingerprint, users are guided through the process of choosing and applying appropriate validation metrics while being made aware of potential pitfalls. Metrics Reloaded targets image analysis problems that can be interpreted as classification tasks at image, object or pixel level, namely image-level classification, object detection, semantic segmentation and instance segmentation tasks. To improve the user experience, we implemented the framework in the Metrics Reloaded online tool. Following the convergence of ML methodology across application domains, Metrics Reloaded fosters the convergence of validation methodology. Its applicability is demonstrated for various biomedical use cases.

The crucial role of bioimage analysts in scientific research and publication.

Bioimage analysis (BIA), a crucial discipline in biological research, overcomes the limitations of subjective analysis in microscopy through the creation and application of quantitative and reproducible methods. The establishment of dedicated BIA support within academic institutions is vital to improving research quality and efficiency and can significantly advance scientific discovery. However, a lack of training resources, limited career paths and insufficient recognition of the contributions made by bioimage analysts prevent the full realization of this potential. This Perspective - the result of the recent The Company of Biologists Workshop 'Effectively Communicating Bioimage Analysis', which aimed to summarize the global BIA landscape, categorize obstacles and offer possible solutions - proposes strategies to bring about a cultural shift towards recognizing the value of BIA by standardizing tools, improving training and encouraging formal credit for contributions. We also advocate for increased funding, standardized practices and enhanced collaboration, and we conclude with a call to action for all stakeholders to join efforts in advancing BIA.

Active learning for extracting surgomic features in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: a prospective annotation study.

BACKGROUND: With Surgomics, we aim for personalized prediction of the patient's surgical outcome using machine-learning (ML) on multimodal intraoperative data to extract surgomic features as surgical process characteristics. As high-quality annotations by medical experts are crucial, but still a bottleneck, we prospectively investigate active learning (AL) to reduce annotation effort and present automatic recognition of surgomic features. METHODS: To establish a process for development of surgomic features, ten video-based features related to bleeding, as highly relevant intraoperative complication, were chosen. They comprise the amount of blood and smoke in the surgical field, six instruments, and two anatomic structures. Annotation of selected frames from robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomies was performed by at least three independent medical experts. To test whether AL reduces annotation effort, we performed a prospective annotation study comparing AL with equidistant sampling (EQS) for frame selection. Multiple Bayesian ResNet18 architectures were trained on a multicentric dataset, consisting of 22 videos from two centers. RESULTS: In total, 14,004 frames were tag annotated. A mean F1-score of 0.75 ± 0.16 was achieved for all features. The highest F1-score was achieved for the instruments (mean 0.80 ± 0.17). This result is also reflected in the inter-rater-agreement (1-rater-kappa > 0.82). Compared to EQS, AL showed better recognition results for the instruments with a significant difference in the McNemar test comparing correctness of predictions. Moreover, in contrast to EQS, AL selected more frames of the four less common instruments (1512 vs. 607 frames) and achieved higher F1-scores for common instruments while requiring less training frames. CONCLUSION: We presented ten surgomic features relevant for bleeding events in esophageal surgery automatically extracted from surgical video using ML. AL showed the potential to reduce annotation effort while keeping ML performance high for selected features. The source code and the trained models are published open source.

Ten years of image analysis and machine learning competitions in dementia.

Machine learning methods exploiting multi-parametric biomarkers, especially based on neuroimaging, have huge potential to improve early diagnosis of dementia and to predict which individuals are at-risk of developing dementia. To benchmark algorithms in the field of machine learning and neuroimaging in dementia and assess their potential for use in clinical practice and clinical trials, seven grand challenges have been organized in the last decade: MIRIAD (2012), Alzheimer's Disease Big Data DREAM (2014), CADDementia (2014), Machine Learning Challenge (2014), MCI Neuroimaging (2017), TADPOLE (2017), and the Predictive Analytics Competition (2019). Based on two challenge evaluation frameworks, we analyzed how these grand challenges are complementing each other regarding research questions, datasets, validation approaches, results and impact. The seven grand challenges addressed questions related to screening, clinical status estimation, prediction and monitoring in (pre-clinical) dementia. There was little overlap in clinical questions, tasks and performance metrics. Whereas this aids providing insight on a broad range of questions, it also limits the validation of results across challenges. The validation process itself was mostly comparable between challenges, using similar methods for ensuring objective comparison, uncertainty estimation and statistical testing. In general, winning algorithms performed rigorous data pre-processing and combined a wide range of input features. Despite high state-of-the-art performances, most of the methods evaluated by the challenges are not clinically used. To increase impact, future challenges could pay more attention to statistical analysis of which factors (i.e., features, models) relate to higher performance, to clinical questions beyond Alzheimer's disease, and to using testing data beyond the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Grand challenges would be an ideal venue for assessing the generalizability of algorithm performance to unseen data of other cohorts. Key for increasing impact in this way are larger testing data sizes, which could be reached by sharing algorithms rather than data to exploit data that cannot be shared. Given the potential and lessons learned in the past ten years, we are excited by the prospects of grand challenges in machine learning and neuroimaging for the next ten years and beyond.

Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation.

Validation metrics are key for the reliable tracking of scientific progress and for bridging the current chasm between artificial intelligence (AI) research and its translation into practice. However, increasing evidence shows that particularly in image analysis, metrics are often chosen inadequately in relation to the underlying research problem. This could be attributed to a lack of accessibility of metric-related knowledge: While taking into account the individual strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of validation metrics is a critical prerequisite to making educated choices, the relevant knowledge is currently scattered and poorly accessible to individual researchers. Based on a multi-stage Delphi process conducted by a multidisciplinary expert consortium as well as extensive community feedback, the present work provides the first reliable and comprehensive common point of access to information on pitfalls related to validation metrics in image analysis. Focusing on biomedical image analysis but with the potential of transfer to other fields, the addressed pitfalls generalize across application domains and are categorized according to a newly created, domain-agnostic taxonomy. To facilitate comprehension, illustrations and specific examples accompany each pitfall. As a structured body of information accessible to researchers of all levels of expertise, this work enhances global comprehension of a key topic in image analysis validation.

Radiomics workflow definition & challenges - German priority program 2177 consensus statement on clinically applied radiomics.

OBJECTIVES: Achieving a consensus on a definition for different aspects of radiomics workflows to support their translation into clinical usage. Furthermore, to assess the perspective of experts on important challenges for a successful clinical workflow implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The consensus was achieved by a multi-stage process. Stage 1 comprised a definition screening, a retrospective analysis with semantic mapping of terms found in 22 workflow definitions, and the compilation of an initial baseline definition. Stages 2 and 3 consisted of a Delphi process with over 45 experts hailing from sites participating in the German Research Foundation (DFG) Priority Program 2177. Stage 2 aimed to achieve a broad consensus for a definition proposal, while stage 3 identified the importance of translational challenges. RESULTS: Workflow definitions from 22 publications (published 2012-2020) were analyzed. Sixty-nine definition terms were extracted, mapped, and semantic ambiguities (e.g., homonymous and synonymous terms) were identified and resolved. The consensus definition was developed via a Delphi process. The final definition comprising seven phases and 37 aspects reached a high overall consensus (> 89% of experts "agree" or "strongly agree"). Two aspects reached no strong consensus. In addition, the Delphi process identified and characterized from the participating experts' perspective the ten most important challenges in radiomics workflows. CONCLUSION: To overcome semantic inconsistencies between existing definitions and offer a well-defined, broad, referenceable terminology, a consensus workflow definition for radiomics-based setups and a terms mapping to existing literature was compiled. Moreover, the most relevant challenges towards clinical application were characterized. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Lack of standardization represents one major obstacle to successful clinical translation of radiomics. Here, we report a consensus workflow definition on different aspects of radiomics studies and highlight important challenges to advance the clinical adoption of radiomics. KEY POINTS: Published radiomics workflow terminologies are inconsistent, hindering standardization and translation. A consensus radiomics workflow definition proposal with high agreement was developed. Publicly available result resources for further exploitation by the scientific community.

Beyond rankings: Learning (more) from algorithm validation.

Challenges have become the state-of-the-art approach to benchmark image analysis algorithms in a comparative manner. While the validation on identical data sets was a great step forward, results analysis is often restricted to pure ranking tables, leaving relevant questions unanswered. Specifically, little effort has been put into the systematic investigation on what characterizes images in which state-of-the-art algorithms fail. To address this gap in the literature, we (1) present a statistical framework for learning from challenges and (2) instantiate it for the specific task of instrument instance segmentation in laparoscopic videos. Our framework relies on the semantic meta data annotation of images, which serves as foundation for a General Linear Mixed Models (GLMM) analysis. Based on 51,542 meta data annotations performed on 2,728 images, we applied our approach to the results of the Robust Medical Instrument Segmentation Challenge (ROBUST-MIS) challenge 2019 and revealed underexposure, motion and occlusion of instruments as well as the presence of smoke or other objects in the background as major sources of algorithm failure. Our subsequent method development, tailored to the specific remaining issues, yielded a deep learning model with state-of-the-art overall performance and specific strengths in the processing of images in which previous methods tended to fail. Due to the objectivity and generic applicability of our approach, it could become a valuable tool for validation in the field of medical image analysis and beyond.

Comparative validation of machine learning algorithms for surgical workflow and skill analysis with the HeiChole benchmark.

PURPOSE: Surgical workflow and skill analysis are key technologies for the next generation of cognitive surgical assistance systems. These systems could increase the safety of the operation through context-sensitive warnings and semi-autonomous robotic assistance or improve training of surgeons via data-driven feedback. In surgical workflow analysis up to 91% average precision has been reported for phase recognition on an open data single-center video dataset. In this work we investigated the generalizability of phase recognition algorithms in a multicenter setting including more difficult recognition tasks such as surgical action and surgical skill. METHODS: To achieve this goal, a dataset with 33 laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos from three surgical centers with a total operation time of 22 h was created. Labels included framewise annotation of seven surgical phases with 250 phase transitions, 5514 occurences of four surgical actions, 6980 occurences of 21 surgical instruments from seven instrument categories and 495 skill classifications in five skill dimensions. The dataset was used in the 2019 international Endoscopic Vision challenge, sub-challenge for surgical workflow and skill analysis. Here, 12 research teams trained and submitted their machine learning algorithms for recognition of phase, action, instrument and/or skill assessment. RESULTS: F1-scores were achieved for phase recognition between 23.9% and 67.7% (n = 9 teams), for instrument presence detection between 38.5% and 63.8% (n = 8 teams), but for action recognition only between 21.8% and 23.3% (n = 5 teams). The average absolute error for skill assessment was 0.78 (n = 1 team). CONCLUSION: Surgical workflow and skill analysis are promising technologies to support the surgical team, but there is still room for improvement, as shown by our comparison of machine learning algorithms. This novel HeiChole benchmark can be used for comparable evaluation and validation of future work. In future studies, it is of utmost importance to create more open, high-quality datasets in order to allow the development of artificial intelligence and cognitive robotics in surgery.

Semantic segmentation of multispectral photoacoustic images using deep learning.

Photoacoustic (PA) imaging has the potential to revolutionize functional medical imaging in healthcare due to the valuable information on tissue physiology contained in multispectral photoacoustic measurements. Clinical translation of the technology requires conversion of the high-dimensional acquired data into clinically relevant and interpretable information. In this work, we present a deep learning-based approach to semantic segmentation of multispectral photoacoustic images to facilitate image interpretability. Manually annotated photoacoustic and ultrasound imaging data are used as reference and enable the training of a deep learning-based segmentation algorithm in a supervised manner. Based on a validation study with experimentally acquired data from 16 healthy human volunteers, we show that automatic tissue segmentation can be used to create powerful analyses and visualizations of multispectral photoacoustic images. Due to the intuitive representation of high-dimensional information, such a preprocessing algorithm could be a valuable means to facilitate the clinical translation of photoacoustic imaging.

MOOD 2020: A Public Benchmark for Out-of-Distribution Detection and Localization on Medical Images.

Detecting Out-of-Distribution (OoD) data is one of the greatest challenges in safe and robust deployment of machine learning algorithms in medicine. When the algorithms encounter cases that deviate from the distribution of the training data, they often produce incorrect and over-confident predictions. OoD detection algorithms aim to catch erroneous predictions in advance by analysing the data distribution and detecting potential instances of failure. Moreover, flagging OoD cases may support human readers in identifying incidental findings. Due to the increased interest in OoD algorithms, benchmarks for different domains have recently been established. In the medical imaging domain, for which reliable predictions are often essential, an open benchmark has been missing. We introduce the Medical-Out-Of-Distribution-Analysis-Challenge (MOOD) as an open, fair, and unbiased benchmark for OoD methods in the medical imaging domain. The analysis of the submitted algorithms shows that performance has a strong positive correlation with the perceived difficulty, and that all algorithms show a high variance for different anomalies, making it yet hard to recommend them for clinical practice. We also see a strong correlation between challenge ranking and performance on a simple toy test set, indicating that this might be a valuable addition as a proxy dataset during anomaly detection algorithm development.

The Medical Segmentation Decathlon.

International challenges have become the de facto standard for comparative assessment of image analysis algorithms. Although segmentation is the most widely investigated medical image processing task, the various challenges have been organized to focus only on specific clinical tasks. We organized the Medical Segmentation Decathlon (MSD)-a biomedical image analysis challenge, in which algorithms compete in a multitude of both tasks and modalities to investigate the hypothesis that a method capable of performing well on multiple tasks will generalize well to a previously unseen task and potentially outperform a custom-designed solution. MSD results confirmed this hypothesis, moreover, MSD winner continued generalizing well to a wide range of other clinical problems for the next two years. Three main conclusions can be drawn from this study: (1) state-of-the-art image segmentation algorithms generalize well when retrained on unseen tasks; (2) consistent algorithmic performance across multiple tasks is a strong surrogate of algorithmic generalizability; (3) the training of accurate AI segmentation models is now commoditized to scientists that are not versed in AI model training.

Common Pitfalls and Recommendations for Grand Challenges in Medical Artificial Intelligence.

With the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms on medical research on the rise, the importance of competitions for comparative validation of algorithms, so-called challenges, has been steadily increasing, to a point at which challenges can be considered major drivers of research, particularly in the biomedical image analysis domain. Given their importance, high quality, transparency, and interpretability of challenges is essential for good scientific practice and meaningful validation of AI algorithms, for instance towards clinical translation. This mini-review presents several issues related to the design, execution, and interpretation of challenges in the biomedical domain and provides best-practice recommendations. PATIENT SUMMARY: This paper presents recommendations on how to reliably compare the usefulness of new artificial intelligence methods for analysis of medical images.

Methods and open-source toolkit for analyzing and visualizing challenge results.

Grand challenges have become the de facto standard for benchmarking image analysis algorithms. While the number of these international competitions is steadily increasing, surprisingly little effort has been invested in ensuring high quality design, execution and reporting for these international competitions. Specifically, results analysis and visualization in the event of uncertainties have been given almost no attention in the literature. Given these shortcomings, the contribution of this paper is two-fold: (1) we present a set of methods to comprehensively analyze and visualize the results of single-task and multi-task challenges and apply them to a number of simulated and real-life challenges to demonstrate their specific strengths and weaknesses; (2) we release the open-source framework challengeR as part of this work to enable fast and wide adoption of the methodology proposed in this paper. Our approach offers an intuitive way to gain important insights into the relative and absolute performance of algorithms, which cannot be revealed by commonly applied visualization techniques. This is demonstrated by the experiments performed in the specific context of biomedical image analysis challenges. Our framework could thus become an important tool for analyzing and visualizing challenge results in the field of biomedical image analysis and beyond.

Heidelberg colorectal data set for surgical data science in the sensor operating room.

Image-based tracking of medical instruments is an integral part of surgical data science applications. Previous research has addressed the tasks of detecting, segmenting and tracking medical instruments based on laparoscopic video data. However, the proposed methods still tend to fail when applied to challenging images and do not generalize well to data they have not been trained on. This paper introduces the Heidelberg Colorectal (HeiCo) data set - the first publicly available data set enabling comprehensive benchmarking of medical instrument detection and segmentation algorithms with a specific emphasis on method robustness and generalization capabilities. Our data set comprises 30 laparoscopic videos and corresponding sensor data from medical devices in the operating room for three different types of laparoscopic surgery. Annotations include surgical phase labels for all video frames as well as information on instrument presence and corresponding instance-wise segmentation masks for surgical instruments (if any) in more than 10,000 individual frames. The data has successfully been used to organize international competitions within the Endoscopic Vision Challenges 2017 and 2019.

Comparative validation of multi-instance instrument segmentation in endoscopy: Results of the ROBUST-MIS 2019 challenge.

Intraoperative tracking of laparoscopic instruments is often a prerequisite for computer and robotic-assisted interventions. While numerous methods for detecting, segmenting and tracking of medical instruments based on endoscopic video images have been proposed in the literature, key limitations remain to be addressed: Firstly, robustness, that is, the reliable performance of state-of-the-art methods when run on challenging images (e.g. in the presence of blood, smoke or motion artifacts). Secondly, generalization; algorithms trained for a specific intervention in a specific hospital should generalize to other interventions or institutions. In an effort to promote solutions for these limitations, we organized the Robust Medical Instrument Segmentation (ROBUST-MIS) challenge as an international benchmarking competition with a specific focus on the robustness and generalization capabilities of algorithms. For the first time in the field of endoscopic image processing, our challenge included a task on binary segmentation and also addressed multi-instance detection and segmentation. The challenge was based on a surgical data set comprising 10,040 annotated images acquired from a total of 30 surgical procedures from three different types of surgery. The validation of the competing methods for the three tasks (binary segmentation, multi-instance detection and multi-instance segmentation) was performed in three different stages with an increasing domain gap between the training and the test data. The results confirm the initial hypothesis, namely that algorithm performance degrades with an increasing domain gap. While the average detection and segmentation quality of the best-performing algorithms is high, future research should concentrate on detection and segmentation of small, crossing, moving and transparent instrument(s) (parts).

BIAS: Transparent reporting of biomedical image analysis challenges.

The number of biomedical image analysis challenges organized per year is steadily increasing. These international competitions have the purpose of benchmarking algorithms on common data sets, typically to identify the best method for a given problem. Recent research, however, revealed that common practice related to challenge reporting does not allow for adequate interpretation and reproducibility of results. To address the discrepancy between the impact of challenges and the quality (control), the Biomedical Image Analysis ChallengeS (BIAS) initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of challenges. The BIAS statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a biomedical image analysis challenge regardless of field of application, image modality or task category assessed. This article describes how the BIAS statement was developed and presents a checklist which authors of biomedical image analysis challenges are encouraged to include in their submission when giving a paper on a challenge into review. The purpose of the checklist is to standardize and facilitate the review process and raise interpretability and reproducibility of challenge results by making relevant information explicit.

Author Correction: Why rankings of biomedical image analysis competitions should be interpreted with care.

In the original version of this Article the values in the rightmost column of Table 1 were inadvertently shifted relative to the other columns. This has now been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.

Why rankings of biomedical image analysis competitions should be interpreted with care.

International challenges have become the standard for validation of biomedical image analysis methods. Given their scientific impact, it is surprising that a critical analysis of common practices related to the organization of challenges has not yet been performed. In this paper, we present a comprehensive analysis of biomedical image analysis challenges conducted up to now. We demonstrate the importance of challenges and show that the lack of quality control has critical consequences. First, reproducibility and interpretation of the results is often hampered as only a fraction of relevant information is typically provided. Second, the rank of an algorithm is generally not robust to a number of variables such as the test data used for validation, the ranking scheme applied and the observers that make the reference annotations. To overcome these problems, we recommend best practice guidelines and define open research questions to be addressed in the future.