Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31496841›Full record

ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2019

An automated mammogram classification system using modified support vector machine.

Aderonke Anthonia Kayode, Noah Oluwatobi Akande, Adekanmi Adeyinka Adegun, Marion Olubunmi Adebiyi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Aderonke Anthonia KayodeComputer Science Department, Landmark University, Omu-Aran, Kwara State, Nigeria.
Noah Oluwatobi AkandeComputer Science Department, Landmark University, Omu-Aran, Kwara State, Nigeria.
Adekanmi Adeyinka AdegunComputer Science Department, Landmark University, Omu-Aran, Kwara State, Nigeria.
Marion Olubunmi AdebiyiDepartment of Computer and Information Sciences, Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBreast cancer remains a serious public health problem that results in the loss of lives among women. However, early detection of its signs increases treatment options and the likelihood of cure. Although mammography has been established to be a proven technique of examining symptoms of cancer in mammograms, the manual observation by radiologists is demanding and often prone to diagnostic errors. Therefore, computer aided diagnosis (CADx) systems could be a viable alternative that could facilitate and ease cancer diagnosis process; hence this study. METHODOLOGY: The inputs to the proposed model are raw mammograms downloaded from the Mammographic Image Analysis Society database. Prior to the classification, the raw mammograms were preprocessed. Then, gray level co-occurrence matrix was used to extract fifteen textural features from the mammograms at four different angular directions: θ={0°, 45°, 90°, 135°}, and two distances: D={1,2}. Afterwards, a two-stage support vector machine was used to classify the mammograms as normal, benign and malignant.

resultsAll of the 37 normal images used as test data were classified as normal (no false positive) and all 41 abnormal images were correctly classified to be abnormal (no false negative), meaning that the sensitivity and specificity of the model in detecting abnormality is 100%. After the detection of abnormality, the system further classified the abnormality on the mammograms to be either "benign" or "malignant". Out of 23 benign images, 21 were truly classified as benign. Also, out of 18 malignant images, 17 were truly classified to be malignant. From these findings, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the system are 94.4%, 91.3%, 89.5%, and 95.5%, respectively.

conclusionThis article has further affirmed the prowess of automated CADx systems as a viable tool that could facilitate breast cancer diagnosis by radiologists.

Indexed as

CADx systemscancer diagnosisdiagnostic errorsGLCMradiologists

Identifiers

PMID31496841
PMCPMC6697673

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.