Additional file 1 of Differences in technical and clinical perspectives on AI validation in cancer imaging: mind the gap!

Additional file 1: Table C 1. The correspondence of ‘Roles’ Combinations to Clinical and Technical group. Table C 2. Age-working place combinations of the whole group. Figure C 1. Responses regarding user roles (model training, model validation (technical), model validation (clinical), clinical expert, data provider and data curation). Multiple responses were possible. Figure C 2. Stacked bar plots on some ‘Technical validation’ topics comparing technical and clinical profiles points of view. Figure C 3. Stacked bar plots on some ‘Bias and fairness’ topics comparing technical and clinical profiles points of view. Figure D 2. Bar plot about the use of permutation-based techniques to assess model stability by TG respondents. The x axis indicates the proportion of responses. Figure D 3. Bar plot about the use of nested cross-validation by TG respondents. The x axis indicates the proportion of responses. Figure D 4. Bar plot about the strategy of reporting regression models adopted by TG re-spondents. The x axis indicates the proportion of responses. Figure D 5. Dataset Splits. Figure D 6. Use of Permutation Techniques. Figure D 7. Segmentation evaluation metrics. Figure D 8. Regression evaluation metrics. Figure D 9 Reporting on regression models. Figure E 1. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Overall strategy for model building and validation’ top-ics where clinicians would benefit from further exposure. Figure E 2. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Technical Validation’ topics where clinicians would ben-efit from further exposure. Figure E 3. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Technical Validation’ topics where clinicians are some-how limited. Figure E 4. Bar plots on the multiple-choice question regarding permutation-based tech-niques. Figure E 5. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Statistical analysis and evaluation metrics’ topics where clinicians would benefit from further exposure. Figure E 6. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Bias and Fairness’ topics where clinicians are some-how limited. Figure E 7. Word cloud from common terms emerged from open questions on AI validation strategies. Table E 1 List of themes that emerged from the data analysis and concepts per theme. Table E 2 List of themes that emerged from the data analysis and concepts per theme. In the verbatim quotes, ‘P’ stands for participant

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28217026
Primary Topic
Historical and Archaeological Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Additional file 1 of Differences in technical and clinical perspectives on AI validation in cancer imaging: mind the gap!

Figshare
Historical and Archaeological Studies
article

Additional file 1 of Differences in technical and clinical perspectives on AI validation in cancer imaging: mind the gap!

article en

Abstract

Additional file 1: Table C 1. The correspondence of ‘Roles’ Combinations to Clinical and Technical group. Table C 2. Age-working place combinations of the whole group. Figure C 1. Responses regarding user roles (model training, model validation (technical), model validation (clinical), clinical expert, data provider and data curation). Multiple responses were possible. Figure C 2. Stacked bar plots on some ‘Technical validation’ topics comparing technical and clinical profiles points of view. Figure C 3. Stacked bar plots on some ‘Bias and fairness’ topics comparing technical and clinical profiles points of view. Figure D 2. Bar plot about the use of permutation-based techniques to assess model stability by TG respondents. The x axis indicates the proportion of responses. Figure D 3. Bar plot about the use of nested cross-validation by TG respondents. The x axis indicates the proportion of responses. Figure D 4. Bar plot about the strategy of reporting regression models adopted by TG re-spondents. The x axis indicates the proportion of responses. Figure D 5. Dataset Splits. Figure D 6. Use of Permutation Techniques. Figure D 7. Segmentation evaluation metrics. Figure D 8. Regression evaluation metrics. Figure D 9 Reporting on regression models. Figure E 1. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Overall strategy for model building and validation’ top-ics where clinicians would benefit from further exposure. Figure E 2. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Technical Validation’ topics where clinicians would ben-efit from further exposure. Figure E 3. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Technical Validation’ topics where clinicians are some-how limited. Figure E 4. Bar plots on the multiple-choice question regarding permutation-based tech-niques. Figure E 5. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Statistical analysis and evaluation metrics’ topics where clinicians would benefit from further exposure. Figure E 6. Stacked bar plots on the ‘Bias and Fairness’ topics where clinicians are some-how limited. Figure E 7. Word cloud from common terms emerged from open questions on AI validation strategies. Table E 1 List of themes that emerged from the data analysis and concepts per theme. Table E 2 List of themes that emerged from the data analysis and concepts per theme. In the verbatim quotes, ‘P’ stands for participant

Figshare
Champalimaud Foundation (PT), Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ES), University of Konstanz (DE), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR), Institute of Information Science (SI), Universitat de Barcelona (ES), Gdańsk Medical University (PL), Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas (GR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Historical and Archaeological Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.