  Medical image analysis studies usually require medical image datasets for
training, testing and validation of algorithms. The need is underscored by the
deep learning revolution and the dominance of machine learning in recent
medical image analysis research. Nevertheless, due to ethical and legal
constraints, commercial conflicts and the dependence on busy medical
professionals, medical image analysis researchers have been described as "data
starved". Due to the lack of objective criteria for sufficiency of dataset
size, the research community implicitly sets ad-hoc standards by means of the
peer review process. We hypothesize that peer review requires researchers to
report the use of ever-increasing datasets as one condition for acceptance of
their work to reputable publication venues. To test this hypothesis, we scanned
the proceedings of the eminent MICCAI (Medical Image Computing and
Computer-Assisted Intervention) conferences from 2011 to 2018. From a total of
2136 articles, we focused on 907 papers involving human datasets of MRI
(Magnetic Resonance Imaging), CT (Computed Tomography) and fMRI (functional
MRI) images. For each modality, for each of the years 2011-2018 we calculated
the average, geometric mean and median number of human subjects used in that
year's MICCAI articles. The results corroborate the dataset growth hypothesis.
Specifically, the annual median dataset size in MICCAI articles has grown
roughly 3-10 times from 2011 to 2018, depending on the imaging modality.
Statistical analysis further supports the dataset growth hypothesis and reveals
exponential growth of the geometric mean dataset size, with annual growth of
about 21% for MRI, 24% for CT and 31% for fMRI. In slight analogy to Moore's
law, the results can provide guidance about trends in the expectations of the
medical image analysis community regarding dataset size.
