Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33309994›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2021

Comparison of segmentation-free and segmentation-dependent computer-aided diagnosis of breast masses on a public mammography dataset.

Rebecca Sawyer Lee, Jared A Dunnmon, Ann He, Siyi Tang, Christopher Ré, Daniel L Rubin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

6 authors.

Rebecca Sawyer LeeStanford University Biomedical Informatics Training Program, United States.
Jared A DunnmonStanford University Department of Computer Science, United States. Electronic address: jdunnmon@cs.stanford.edu.
Ann HeStanford University Department of Computer Science, United States.
Siyi TangStanford University Department of Electrical Engineering, United States.
Christopher RéStanford University Department of Computer Science, United States.
Daniel L RubinStanford University Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Data Science, United States.

Funding

Training CoreU54EB020405 · NIBIB · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DELP, SCOTT L · 2014 to 2018
$11.6M
Extracellular vesicles and their ncRNA cargo as markers of trophoblast injuryR01HD086325 · NICHD · MAGEE-WOMEN'S RES INST AND FOUNDATION · PI SADOVSKY, YOEL · 2015 to 2019
$3.6M
Distributed Learning of Deep Learning Models for Cancer ResearchU01CA242879 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI KALPATHY-CRAMER, JAYASHREE, RUBIN, DANIEL L · 2019 to 2021
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA242879NIBIB NIH HHS U54 EB020405NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD086325
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare machine learning methods for classifying mass lesions on mammography images that use predefined image features computed over lesion segmentations to those that leverage segmentation-free representation learning on a standard, public evaluation dataset.

methodsWe apply several classification algorithms to the public Curated Breast Imaging Subset of the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (CBIS-DDSM), in which each image contains a mass lesion. Segmentation-free representation learning techniques for classifying lesions as benign or malignant include both a Bag-of-Visual-Words (BoVW) method and a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). We compare classification performance of these techniques to that obtained using two different segmentation-dependent approaches from the literature that rely on specific combinations of end classifiers (e.g. linear discriminant analysis, neural networks) and predefined features computed over the lesion segmentation (e.g. spiculation measure, morphological characteristics, intensity metrics).

resultsWe report area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (A

conclusionsWe find that malignancy classification performance on the CBIS-DDSM dataset using segmentation-free BoVW features is comparable to that of the best segmentation-dependent methods we study, but also observe that a common segmentation-free CNN model substantially and significantly outperforms each of these (p < 0.05). These results reinforce recent findings suggesting that representation learning techniques such as BoVW and CNNs are advantageous for mammogram analysis because they do not require lesion segmentation, the quality and specific characteristics of which can vary substantially across datasets. We further observe that segmentation-dependent methods achieve performance levels on CBIS-DDSM inferior to those achieved on the original evaluation datasets reported in the literature. Each of these findings reinforces the need for standardization of datasets, segmentation techniques, and model implementations in performance assessments of automated classifiers for medical imaging.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMammographyBreastComputersEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansComputer assisted diagnosisDeep learningMammographySegmentation

Identifiers

PMID33309994
PMCPMC7987253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.