Estimating diagnostic uncertainty in artificial intelligence assisted pathology using conformal prediction

dc.contributor.authorOlsson Henrik
dc.contributor.authorKartasalo Kimmo
dc.contributor.authorMulliqi Nita
dc.contributor.authorCapuccini Marco
dc.contributor.authorRuusuvuori Pekka
dc.contributor.authorSamaratunga Hemamali
dc.contributor.authorDelahunt Brett
dc.contributor.authorLindskog Cecilia
dc.contributor.authorJanssen Emiel A.M.
dc.contributor.authorBlilie Anders
dc.contributor.authorEgevad Lars
dc.contributor.authorSpjuth Ola
dc.contributor.authorEklund Martin
dc.contributor.organizationfi=biolääketieteen laitos|en=Institute of Biomedicine|
dc.contributor.organization-code1.2.246.10.2458963.20.77952289591
dc.converis.publication-id178434671
dc.converis.urlhttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/Publication/178434671
dc.date.accessioned2025-08-28T01:20:35Z
dc.date.available2025-08-28T01:20:35Z
dc.description.abstract<p>Unreliable predictions can occur when an artificial intelligence (AI) system is presented with data it has not been exposed to during training. We demonstrate the use of conformal prediction to detect unreliable predictions, using histopathological diagnosis and grading of prostate biopsies as example. We digitized 7788 prostate biopsies from 1192 men in the STHLM3 diagnostic study, used for training, and 3059 biopsies from 676 men used for testing. With conformal prediction, 1 in 794 (0.1%) predictions is incorrect for cancer diagnosis (compared to 14 errors [2%] without conformal prediction) while 175 (22%) of the predictions are flagged as unreliable when the AI-system is presented with new data from the same lab and scanner that it was trained on. Conformal prediction could with small samples (N = 49 for external scanner, N = 10 for external lab and scanner, and N = 12 for external lab, scanner and pathology assessment) detect systematic differences in external data leading to worse predictive performance. The AI-system with conformal prediction commits 3 (2%) errors for cancer detection in cases of atypical prostate tissue compared to 44 (25%) without conformal prediction, while the system flags 143 (80%) unreliable predictions. We conclude that conformal prediction can increase patient safety of AI-systems.<br></p>
dc.identifier.eissn2041-1723
dc.identifier.jour-issn2041-1723
dc.identifier.olddbid207413
dc.identifier.oldhandle10024/190440
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/11111/51257
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-34945-8
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi-fe2023020726012
dc.language.isoen
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorRuusuvuori, Pekka
dc.okm.discipline318 Medical biotechnologyen_GB
dc.okm.discipline318 Lääketieteen bioteknologiafi_FI
dc.okm.internationalcopublicationinternational co-publication
dc.okm.internationalityInternational publication
dc.okm.typeA1 ScientificArticle
dc.publisherNature Research
dc.publisher.countryUnited Kingdomen_GB
dc.publisher.countryBritanniafi_FI
dc.publisher.country-codeGB
dc.relation.articlenumber7761
dc.relation.doi10.1038/s41467-022-34945-8
dc.relation.ispartofjournalNature Communications
dc.relation.issue1
dc.relation.volume13
dc.source.identifierhttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/190440
dc.titleEstimating diagnostic uncertainty in artificial intelligence assisted pathology using conformal prediction
dc.year.issued2022

Tiedostot

Näytetään 1 - 1 / 1
Ladataan...
Name:
s41467-022-34945-8.pdf
Size:
1.26 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format