Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30207594›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of dermatology2019

Diagnostic accuracy of content-based dermatoscopic image retrieval with deep classification features.

P Tschandl, G Argenziano, M Razmara, J Yap

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of dermatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Survey on Human Cancer Categorization Based on Deep Learning.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Machine learning for precision dermatology: Advances, opportunities, and outlook.Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. [Artificial intelligence and smartphone program applications (Apps) : Relevance for dermatological practice].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

P TschandlSchool of Computing Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0391-7810
G ArgenzianoDepartment of Dermatology, University of Campania, Naples, Italy.
M RazmaraMetaOptima Technology Inc., Vancouver, BC, Canada.
J YapMetaOptima Technology Inc., Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAutomated classification of medical images through neural networks can reach high accuracy rates but lacks interpretability.

objectivesTo compare the diagnostic accuracy obtained by using content-based image retrieval (CBIR) to retrieve visually similar dermatoscopic images with corresponding disease labels against predictions made by a neural network.

methodsA neural network was trained to predict disease classes on dermatoscopic images from three retrospectively collected image datasets containing 888, 2750 and 16 691 images, respectively. Diagnosis predictions were made based on the most commonly occurring diagnosis in visually similar images, or based on the top-1 class prediction of the softmax output from the network. Outcome measures were area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for predicting a malignant lesion, multiclass-accuracy and mean average precision (mAP), measured on unseen test images of the corresponding dataset.

resultsIn all three datasets the skin cancer predictions from CBIR (evaluating the 16 most similar images) showed AUC values similar to softmax predictions (0·842, 0·806 and 0·852 vs. 0·830, 0·810 and 0·847, respectively; P > 0·99 for all). Similarly, the multiclass-accuracy of CBIR was comparable with softmax predictions. Compared with softmax predictions, networks trained for detecting only three classes performed better on a dataset with eight classes when using CBIR (mAP 0·184 vs. 0·368 and 0·198 vs. 0·403, respectively).

conclusionsPresenting visually similar images based on features from a neural network shows comparable accuracy with the softmax probability-based diagnoses of convolutional neural networks. CBIR may be more helpful than a softmax classifier in improving diagnostic accuracy of clinicians in a routine clinical setting.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDatasets as TopicDermoscopyHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesROC CurveSkinSkin Diseases

Identifiers

PMID30207594
PMCPMC7379719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.