ArticleMedical physics2013
A similarity study of content-based image retrieval system for breast cancer using decision tree.
Article in Medical physics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe are developing a decision tree content-based image retrieval (DTCBIR) CADx system to assist radiologists in characterization of breast masses on ultrasound images.
methodsThree DTCBIR configurations, including decision tree with boosting (DTb), decision tree with full leaf features (DTL), and decision tree with selected leaf features (DTLs) were compared. For DTb, features of a query mass were combined first into a merged feature score and then masses with similar scores were retrieved. For DTL and DTLs, similar masses were retrieved based on the Euclidean distance between feature vectors of the query and those of selected references. For each DTCBIR configuration, we investigated the use of full feature set and subset of features selected by the stepwise linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and simplex optimization method, resulting in six retrieval methods and selected five, DTb-lda, DTL-lda, DTb-full, DTL-full, and DTLs-full, for the observer study. Three MQSA radiologists rated similarities between the query mass and computer-retrieved three most similar masses using nine-point similarity scale (9 = very similar).
resultsFor DTb-lda, DTL-lda, DTb-full, DTL-full, and DTLs-full, average A(z) values were 0.90 ± 0.03, 0.85 ± 0.04, 0.87 ± 0.04, 0.79 ± 0.05, and 0.71 ± 0.06, respectively, and average similarity ratings were 5.00, 5.41, 4.96, 5.33, and 5.13, respectively.
conclusionsThe DTL-lda is a promising DTCBIR CADx configuration which had simple tree structure, good classification performance, and highest similarity rating.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.