MedShift: identifying shift data for medical dataset curation
Open accessAbstract
To curate a high-quality dataset, identifying data variance between the internal and external sources is a fundamental and crucial step. However, methods to detect shift or variance in data have not been significantly researched. Challenges to this are the lack of effective approaches to learn dense representation of a dataset and difficulties of sharing private data across medical institutions. To overcome the problems, we propose a unified pipeline called MedShift to detect the top-level shift samples and thus facilitate the medical curation. Given an internal dataset A as the base source, we first train anomaly detectors for each class of dataset A to learn internal distributions in an unsupervised way. Second, without exchanging data across sources, we run the trained anomaly detectors on an external dataset B for each class. The data samples with high anomaly scores are identified as shift data. To quantify the shiftness of the external dataset, we cluster B's data into groups class-wise based on the obtained scores. We then train a multi-class classifier on A and measure the shiftness with the classifier's performance variance on B by gradually dropping the group with the largest anomaly score for each class. Additionally, we adapt a dataset quality metric to help inspect the distribution differences for multiple medical sources. We verify the efficacy of MedShift with musculoskeletal radiographs (MURA) and chest X-rays datasets from more than one external source. Experiments show our proposed shift data detection pipeline can be beneficial for medical centers to curate high-quality datasets more efficiently. An interface introduction video to visualize our results is available at https://youtu.be/V3BF0P1sxQE.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Collection of data from a single point in time can introduce data drift because hardware and software scanner upgrades, disease incidence and appearance changes, and new treatments may alter image appearance.
“Another less recognized “single source” issue is collection of data from a single point in time. Hardware and software scanner upgrades may alter image appearance. Disease incidence and appearance change with time, and new treatments may affect the appearance. Although the input data to ML systems may remain homogeneous over time, potential data drift should be anticipated (17).”
From Mitigating Bias in Radiology Machine Learning: 1. Data Handling (2022) · cites this paper as [17]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mitigating Bias in Radiology Machine Learning: 1. Data Handling
Rouzrokh, P., Khosravi, B., Faghani, S., Moassefi, M., Vera Garcia, D. V., Singh, Y., Zhang, K., Conte, G. M., & Erickson, B. J. (2022) · Radiology: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1148/ryai.210290 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
MLHOps: Machine Learning Health Operations
Khattak, F. K., Subasri, V., Krishnan, A., Pou-Prom, C., Koçak, S. A., Dolatabadi, E., Pandya, D., Seyyed-Kalantari, L., & Rudzicz, F. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3521279 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Multi-Label Medical Image Retrieval Via Learning Multi-Class SimilarityPreprint
Guo, X., Duan, J., Gichoya, J. W., Trivedi, H., Purkayastha, S., Sharma, A., & Banerjee, I. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4149616 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Guo, X., Gichoya, J. W., Trivedi, H., Purkayastha, S., & Banerjee, I.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2021
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2112.13885
- OpenAlex
- W4226277671
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Purdue University Indianapolis (Indiana University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- shift detection, domain shift, anomaly detection, unsupervised learning, privacy-preserving data sharing, musculoskeletal radiographs, chest radiography
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review