Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32420322›Full record

Trial reportBioMed research international2020

Convolutional Neural Network for Breast and Thyroid Nodules Diagnosis in Ultrasound Imaging.

Xiaowen Liang, Jinsui Yu, Jianyi Liao, Zhiyi Chen

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Artificial intelligence for hepatitis evaluation.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Xiaowen LiangDepartment of Ultrasound Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, 63 Duobao Road, Guangzhou, 510000 Guangdong, China.
Jinsui YuDepartment of Ultrasound Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, 63 Duobao Road, Guangzhou, 510000 Guangdong, China.
Jianyi LiaoDepartment of Ultrasound Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, 63 Duobao Road, Guangzhou, 510000 Guangdong, China.
Zhiyi ChenDepartment of Ultrasound Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, 63 Duobao Road, Guangzhou, 510000 Guangdong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5973-4522

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe incidence of superficial organ diseases has increased rapidly in recent years. New methods such as computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) are widely used to improve diagnostic efficiency. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are one of the most popular methods, and further improvements of CNNs should be considered. This paper aims to develop a multiorgan CAD system based on CNNs for classifying both thyroid and breast nodules and investigate the impact of this system on the diagnostic efficiency of different preprocessing approaches.

methodsThe training and validation sets comprised randomly selected thyroid and breast nodule images. The data were subgrouped into 4 models according to the different preprocessing methods (depending on segmentation and the classification method). A prospective data set was selected to verify the clinical value of the CNN model by comparison with ultrasound guidelines. Diagnostic efficiency was assessed based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

resultsAmong the 4 models, the CNN model using segmented images for classification achieved the best result. For the validation set, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) of our CNN model were 84.9%, 69.0%, 62.5%, 88.2%, 75.0%, and 0.769, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the CNN model and the ultrasound guidelines. The combination of the two methods achieved superior diagnostic efficiency compared with their use individually.

conclusionsThe study demonstrates the probability, feasibility, and clinical value of CAD in the ultrasound diagnosis of multiple organs. The use of segmented images and classification by the nature of the disease are the main factors responsible for the improvement of the CNN model. Moreover, the combination of the CNN model and ultrasound guidelines results in better diagnostic performance, which will contribute to the improved diagnostic efficiency of CAD systems.

Indexed as

Image Processing, Computer-AssistedNeural Networks, ComputerBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansThyroid NoduleUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID32420322
PMCPMC7199615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.