Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

DeidentificationMethod issues #877

Closed
neurolabusc opened this issue Oct 22, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed

DeidentificationMethod issues #877

neurolabusc opened this issue Oct 22, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@neurolabusc
Copy link
Collaborator

The development branch adds DeidentificationMethod fields to meet the latest BIDS specification. The dcm_qa_deident repository provides a concrete example.

The current implementation has several weaknesses (including some detected by @captainnova):

  1. This new feature re-reads DICOM headers (to reduce memory pressure). This should only occur if the file includes de-identification fields, removing the speed penalty for conversions without these values.
  2. When re-reading, there should be a check that the DICOM file still exists. This might also be elicited by weird filenames and file systems.
  3. All deidentification strings should be explicitly set to zero length to avoid overflow errors. The number of items does not predict whether all items have all strings. For example, in the validation dataset, the CodingSchemeVersion (0008,0103) is a property of some but not all DeidentificationMethodCodeSequence items.
neurolabusc added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 22, 2024
@captainnova
Copy link
Collaborator

I encountered bogus DeidentificationMethods for some series if writing to /tmp, but this seems to be a (still undiagnosed) property of my build, and may not have much to do with /tmp being XFS. The input was never in /tmp, and even the output files were not really temporary, so the cause is a mystery.

However, I think the recent changes made for 2. and 3. are good ideas, and they fix the problem.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants