Anatomical Ground Truth: Reality or Illusion?

Misinterpretation Reference ranges and statistical atlases are commonly used in medicine to assist physicians in determining what is abnormal. Originally, organ size and shape were confined to simple weight or linear measurements, including those taken from imaging, such as x-rays. Yet in this computational era, modern datasets are primarily developed using medical imaging. However, many factors can affect the data contained within these databases, and medical imaging techniques each have their own advantages, limitations and disadvantages. The three most common medical imaging methods (ultrasound, CT, and MRI) are discussed, and optical imaging methods are introduced. Anatomical ground truth is the baseline by which the veracity of anatomic data collection methods can be measured. Logically, determination of anatomical ground truth would optimally rely on the direct physical measurement of human organs and structures. Obviously, widespread direct physical access to human organs is limited, and primarily consists of transplanted or pathological organs, including those that have experienced age-related changes. However, the necessity for anatomical ground truth still needs to be addressed as a foundation of both anatomic science, diagnostic imaging, and medicine itself. Discussion of what constitutes anatomical ground truth, and if it is even possible to achieve, is followed by consideration of what is required to achieve anatomical ground truth.