Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407213›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2021

Melanoma diagnosis using deep learning techniques on dermatoscopic images.

Mario Fernando Jojoa Acosta, Liesle Yail Caballero Tovar, Maria Begonya Garcia-Zapirain, Winston Spencer Percybrooks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Mario Fernando Jojoa AcostaeVida Research Laboratory, University of Deusto, Avda. Universidades 24, 48007, Bilbao, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6578-071X
Liesle Yail Caballero TovareVida Research Laboratory, University of Deusto, Avda. Universidades 24, 48007, Bilbao, Spain. lieslec@uninorte.edu.co.ORCID 0000-0003-3744-3879
Maria Begonya Garcia-ZapiraineVida Research Laboratory, University of Deusto, Avda. Universidades 24, 48007, Bilbao, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9356-1186
Winston Spencer PercybrooksDepartment of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Universidad del Norte, Km.5 Vía Puerto Colombia, Barranquilla, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-0169-7562

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMelanoma has become more widespread over the past 30 years and early detection is a major factor in reducing mortality rates associated with this type of skin cancer. Therefore, having access to an automatic, reliable system that is able to detect the presence of melanoma via a dermatoscopic image of lesions and/or skin pigmentation can be a very useful tool in the area of medical diagnosis.

methodsAmong state-of-the-art methods used for automated or computer assisted medical diagnosis, attention should be drawn to Deep Learning based on Convolutional Neural Networks, wherewith segmentation, classification and detection systems for several diseases have been implemented. The method proposed in this paper involves an initial stage that automatically crops the region of interest within a dermatoscopic image using the Mask and Region-based Convolutional Neural Network technique, and a second stage based on a ResNet152 structure, which classifies lesions as either "benign" or "malignant".

resultsTraining, validation and testing of the proposed model was carried out using the database associated to the challenge set out at the 2017 International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging. On the test data set, the proposed model achieves an increase in accuracy and balanced accuracy of 3.66% and 9.96%, respectively, with respect to the best accuracy and the best sensitivity/specificity ratio reported to date for melanoma detection in this challenge. Additionally, unlike previous models, the specificity and sensitivity achieve a high score (greater than 0.8) simultaneously, which indicates that the model is good for accurate discrimination between benign and malignant lesion, not biased towards any of those classes.

conclusionsThe results achieved with the proposed model suggest a significant improvement over the results obtained in the state of the art as far as performance of skin lesion classifiers (malignant/benign) is concerned.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDermoscopyHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMelanomaROC CurveSkin NeoplasmsConvolutional neural networkDeep learningMask R_CNNObject classificationObject detectionTransfer learning

Identifiers

PMID33407213
PMCPMC7789790

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.