Skip to main content

Inferring the Performance of Medical Imaging Algorithms

  • Conference paper
Computer Analysis of Images and Patterns (CAIP 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNIP,volume 6854))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Evaluation of the performance and limitations of medical imaging algorithms is essential to estimate their impact in social, economic or clinical aspects. However, validation of medical imaging techniques is a challenging task due to the variety of imaging and clinical problems involved, as well as, the difficulties for systematically extracting a reliable solely ground truth. Although specific validation protocols are reported in any medical imaging paper, there are still two major concerns: definition of standardized methodologies transversal to all problems and generalization of conclusions to the whole clinical data set.

We claim that both issues would be fully solved if we had a statistical model relating ground truth and the output of computational imaging techniques. Such a statistical model could conclude to what extent the algorithm behaves like the ground truth from the analysis of a sampling of the validation data set. We present a statistical inference framework reporting the agreement and describing the relationship of two quantities. We show its transversality by applying it to validation of two different tasks: contour segmentation and landmark correspondence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Jannin, P., Krupinski, E., Warfield, S.: Guest editorial validation in medical imaging processing. IEEE Trans. on Med. Imag. 25(11), 1405–1409 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wiest-Daesslé, N., Prima, S., Morrissey, S.P., Barillot, C.: Validation of a new optimisation algorithm for registration tasks in medical imaging. In: ISBI 2007, pp. 41–44 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lee, S., Abràmoff, M.D., Reinhardt, J.M.: Validation of retinal image registration algorithms by a projective imaging distortion model. In: Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2007, pp. 6472–6475 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jannin, P., Fitzpatrick, J., Hawkes, D., Pennec, X., Shahidi, R., Vannier, M.: Validation of medical image processing in image-guided therapy. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 21(12), 1445–1449 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gee, J.: Performance evaluation of medical image processing algorithms. In: Proc. SPIE, vol. 3979, pp. 19–27 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Castro, F., Pollo, C., Meuli, R., Maeder, P., Cuisenaire, O., Cuadra, M., Villemure, J.G., Thiran, J.P.: A cross validation study of deep brain stimulation targeting: From experts to atlas-based, segmentation-based and automatic registration algorithms. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 25(11), 1440–1450 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Landis, J., Koch, G.: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33, 159–174 (1977)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Gerig, G., Jomier, M., Chakos, M.: Valmet: A new validation tool for assessing and improving 3D object segmentation. In: Niessen, W.J., Viergever, M.A. (eds.) MICCAI 2001. LNCS, vol. 2208, pp. 516–528. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Bland, J.M., Altman, D.G.: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476), 307–310 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hoppin, J., Kupinski, M., Kastis, G., Clarkson, E., Barrett, H.: Objective comparison of quantitative imaging modalities without the use of a gold standard. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 21(5), 441–449 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Newbold, P., Carlson, W.L., Thorne, B.: Statistics for Business and Economics, 6th edn. Pearson Education, London (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gil, D., Hernàndez, A., Rodriguez, O., Mauri, J., Radeva, P.: Statistical strategy for anisotropic adventitia modelling in IVUS. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 25(6), 768–778 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hernàndez-Sabaté, A., Gil, D., Garcia-Barnés, J., Martí, E.: Image-based cardiac phase retrieval in Intravascular Ultrasound sequences. IEEE Trans. Ultr., Ferr., Freq. Ctr. 58(1), 60–72 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Hernàndez-Sabaté, A., Gil, D., Roche, D., Matsumoto, M.M.S., Furuie, S.S. (2011). Inferring the Performance of Medical Imaging Algorithms. In: Real, P., Diaz-Pernil, D., Molina-Abril, H., Berciano, A., Kropatsch, W. (eds) Computer Analysis of Images and Patterns. CAIP 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6854. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23672-3_63

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23672-3_63

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-23671-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-23672-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics