ArticleBMC bioinformatics2020
Convolutional neural network for automated mass segmentation in mammography.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Performance Evaluation of Deep Learning for the Detection and Segmentation of Thyroid Nodules: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- A two-stage sperm holomorphological analysis method based on multi-output network construction.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Breast cancer classification based on microcalcifications using dual branch vision transformer fusion.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Automatic head and neck tumor segmentation through deep learning and Bayesian optimization on three-dimensional medical images.Computers in biology and medicine · 2025Article
- Digital mammography dataset for breast cancer diagnosis research (DMID) with breast mass segmentation analysis.Biomedical engineering letters · 2024Article
- Mammography with deep learning for breast cancer detection.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Deep Learning for Medical Image-Based Cancer Diagnosis.Cancers · 2023Review
- Convolutional Networks and Transformers for Mammography Classification: An Experimental Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence - based ultrasound elastography for disease evaluation - a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Breast Cancer Classification by Using Multi-Headed Convolutional Neural Network Modeling.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Breast cancer detection: Shallow convolutional neural network against deep convolutional neural networks based approach.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Breast Cancer Classification Using FCN and Beta Wavelet Autoencoder.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- Characteristics of Computed Tomography Images for Patients with Acute Liver Injury Caused by Sepsis under Deep Learning Algorithm.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Connected-UNets: a deep learning architecture for breast mass segmentation.NPJ breast cancer · 2021Article
- High Precision Mammography Lesion Identification From Imprecise Medical Annotations.Frontiers in big data · 2021Article
- Deep Learning-Based CT Imaging in Diagnosing Myeloma and Its Prognosis Evaluation.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- Breast Cancer Segmentation Methods: Current Status and Future Potentials.BioMed research international · 2021Review
- Computer-Aided Diagnosis Evaluation of the Correlation Between Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Molecular Subtypes in Breast Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Boosting Breast Cancer Detection Using Convolutional Neural Network.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutomatic segmentation and localization of lesions in mammogram (MG) images are challenging even with employing advanced methods such as deep learning (DL) methods. We developed a new model based on the architecture of the semantic segmentation U-Net model to precisely segment mass lesions in MG images. The proposed end-to-end convolutional neural network (CNN) based model extracts contextual information by combining low-level and high-level features. We trained the proposed model using huge publicly available databases, (CBIS-DDSM, BCDR-01, and INbreast), and a private database from the University of Connecticut Health Center (UCHC).
resultsWe compared the performance of the proposed model with those of the state-of-the-art DL models including the fully convolutional network (FCN), SegNet, Dilated-Net, original U-Net, and Faster R-CNN models and the conventional region growing (RG) method. The proposed Vanilla U-Net model outperforms the Faster R-CNN model significantly in terms of the runtime and the Intersection over Union metric (IOU). Training with digitized film-based and fully digitized MG images, the proposed Vanilla U-Net model achieves a mean test accuracy of 92.6%. The proposed model achieves a mean Dice coefficient index (DI) of 0.951 and a mean IOU of 0.909 that show how close the output segments are to the corresponding lesions in the ground truth maps. Data augmentation has been very effective in our experiments resulting in an increase in the mean DI and the mean IOU from 0.922 to 0.951 and 0.856 to 0.909, respectively.
conclusionsThe proposed Vanilla U-Net based model can be used for precise segmentation of masses in MG images. This is because the segmentation process incorporates more multi-scale spatial context, and captures more local and global context to predict a precise pixel-wise segmentation map of an input full MG image. These detected maps can help radiologists in differentiating benign and malignant lesions depend on the lesion shapes. We show that using transfer learning, introducing augmentation, and modifying the architecture of the original model results in better performance in terms of the mean accuracy, the mean DI, and the mean IOU in detecting mass lesion compared to the other DL and the conventional models.
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.