BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Eric Westman

Eric Westman contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
eess.IVComputer VisionMachine Learningphysics.med-phQuantitative Methods

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

A deep learning-based pipeline for error detection and quality control of brain MRI segmentation results

Brain MRI segmentation results should always undergo a quality control (QC) process, since automatic segmentation tools can be prone to errors. In this work, we propose two deep learning-based architectures for performing QC automatically. First, we used generative adversarial networks for creating error maps that highlight the locations of segmentation errors. Subsequently, a 3D convolutional neural network was implemented to predict segmentation quality. The present pipeline was shown to achieve promising results and, in particular, high sensitivity in both tasks.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

The reliability of a deep learning model in clinical out-of-distribution MRI data: a multicohort study

Deep learning (DL) methods have in recent years yielded impressive results in medical imaging, with the potential to function as clinical aid to radiologists. However, DL models in medical imaging are often trained on public research cohorts with images acquired with a single scanner or with strict protocol harmonization, which is not representative of a clinical setting. The aim of this study was to investigate how well a DL model performs in unseen clinical data sets---collected with different scanners, protocols and disease populations---and whether more heterogeneous training data improves generalization. In total, 3117 MRI scans of brains from multiple dementia research cohorts and memory clinics, that had been visually rated by a neuroradiologist according to Scheltens' scale of medial temporal atrophy (MTA), were included in this study. By training multiple versions of a convolutional neural network on different subsets of this data to predict MTA ratings, we assessed the impact of including images from a wider distribution during training had on performance in external memory clinic data. Our results showed that our model generalized well to data sets acquired with similar protocols as the training data, but substantially worse in clinical cohorts with visibly different tissue contrasts in the images. This implies that future DL studies investigating performance in out-of-distribution (OOD) MRI data need to assess multiple external cohorts for reliable results. Further, by including data from a wider range of scanners and protocols the performance improved in OOD data, which suggests that more heterogeneous training data makes the model generalize better. To conclude, this is the most comprehensive study to date investigating the domain shift in deep learning on MRI data, and we advocate rigorous evaluation of DL models on clinical data prior to being certified for deployment.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access