A study on the adequacy of common IQA measures for medical images

Image quality assessment (IQA) is standard practice in the development stage of novel machine learning algorithms that operate on images. The most commonly used IQA measures have been developed and tested for natural images, but not in the medical setting. Reported inconsistencies arising in medical images are not surprising, as they have different properties than natural images. In this study, we test the applicability of common IQA measures for medical image data by comparing their assessment to manually rated chest X-ray (5 experts) and photoacoustic image data (1 expert). Moreover, we include supplementary studies on grayscale natural images and accelerated brain MRI data. The results of all experiments show a similar outcome in line with previous findings for medical imaging: PSNR and SSIM in the default setting are in the lower range of the result list and HaarPSI outperforms the other tested measures in the overall performance. Also among the top performers in our medical experiments are the full reference measures DISTS, FSIM, LPIPS and MS-SSIM. Generally, the results on natural images yield considerably higher correlations, suggesting that the additional employment of tailored IQA measures for medical imaging algorithms is needed.

A study of why we need to reassess full reference image quality assessment with medical images

Image quality assessment (IQA) is not just indispensable in clinical practice to ensure high standards, but also in the development stage of novel algorithms that operate on medical images with reference data. This paper provides a structured and comprehensive collection of examples where the two most common full reference (FR) image quality measures prove to be unsuitable for the assessment of novel algorithms using different kinds of medical images, including real-world MRI, CT, OCT, X-Ray, digital pathology and photoacoustic imaging data. In particular, the FR-IQA measures PSNR and SSIM are known and tested for working successfully in many natural imaging tasks, but discrepancies in medical scenarios have been noted in the literature. Inconsistencies arising in medical images are not surprising, as they have very different properties than natural images which have not been targeted nor tested in the development of the mentioned measures, and therefore might imply wrong judgement of novel methods for medical images. Therefore, improvement is urgently needed in particular in this era of AI to increase explainability, reproducibility and generalizability in machine learning for medical imaging and beyond. On top of the pitfalls we will provide ideas for future research as well as suggesting guidelines for the usage of FR-IQA measures applied to medical images.

Data Harmonisation for Information Fusion in Digital Healthcare: A State-of-the-Art Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Future Research Directions

Removing the bias and variance of multicentre data has always been a challenge in large scale digital healthcare studies, which requires the ability to integrate clinical features extracted from data acquired by different scanners and protocols to improve stability and robustness. Previous studies have described various computational approaches to fuse single modality multicentre datasets. However, these surveys rarely focused on evaluation metrics and lacked a checklist for computational data harmonisation studies. In this systematic review, we summarise the computational data harmonisation approaches for multi-modality data in the digital healthcare field, including harmonisation strategies and evaluation metrics based on different theories. In addition, a comprehensive checklist that summarises common practices for data harmonisation studies is proposed to guide researchers to report their research findings more effectively. Last but not least, flowcharts presenting possible ways for methodology and metric selection are proposed and the limitations of different methods have been surveyed for future research.