Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35161552›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Breast Cancer Classification from Ultrasound Images Using Probability-Based Optimal Deep Learning Feature Fusion.

Kiran Jabeen, Muhammad Attique Khan, Majed Alhaisoni, Usman Tariq, Yu-Dong Zhang, Ameer Hamza, Artūras Mickus, Robertas Damaševičius

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors.

Kiran JabeenDepartment of Computer Science, HITEC University Taxila, Taxila 47080, Pakistan.
Muhammad Attique KhanDepartment of Computer Science, HITEC University Taxila, Taxila 47080, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0001-6763-2123
Majed AlhaisoniCollege of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Ha'il, Ha'il 55211, Saudi Arabia.
Usman TariqCollege of Computer Engineering and Science, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharaj 11942, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-7672-1187
Yu-Dong ZhangDepartment of Informatics, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4870-1493
Ameer HamzaDepartment of Computer Science, HITEC University Taxila, Taxila 47080, Pakistan.
Artūras MickusDepartment of Applied Informatics, Vytautas Magnus University, LT-44404 Kaunas, Lithuania.
Robertas DamaševičiusDepartment of Applied Informatics, Vytautas Magnus University, LT-44404 Kaunas, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-9990-1084

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

After lung cancer, breast cancer is the second leading cause of death in women. If breast cancer is detected early, mortality rates in women can be reduced. Because manual breast cancer diagnosis takes a long time, an automated system is required for early cancer detection. This paper proposes a new framework for breast cancer classification from ultrasound images that employs deep learning and the fusion of the best selected features. The proposed framework is divided into five major steps: (i) data augmentation is performed to increase the size of the original dataset for better learning of Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) models; (ii) a pre-trained DarkNet-53 model is considered and the output layer is modified based on the augmented dataset classes; (iii) the modified model is trained using transfer learning and features are extracted from the global average pooling layer; (iv) the best features are selected using two improved optimization algorithms known as reformed differential evaluation (RDE) and reformed gray wolf (RGW); and (v) the best selected features are fused using a new probability-based serial approach and classified using machine learning algorithms. The experiment was conducted on an augmented Breast Ultrasound Images (BUSI) dataset, and the best accuracy was 99.1%. When compared with recent techniques, the proposed framework outperforms them.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsDeep LearningBreastFemaleHumansProbabilityUltrasonography, Mammarybreast cancerclassificationdata augmentationdeep learningfeature optimization

Identifiers

PMID35161552
PMCPMC8840464

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.