ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2022
A real use case of semi-supervised learning for mammogram classification in a local clinic of Costa Rica.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-assisted diagnosis of anemia through peripheral smear image analysis: A cross-validation study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Exploiting Patch Sizes and Resolutions for Multi-Scale Deep Learning in Mammogram Image Classification.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Convolutional Networks and Transformers for Mammography Classification: An Experimental Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Leveraging Multi-Task Learning to Cope With Poor and Missing Labels of Mammograms.Frontiers in radiology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The implementation of deep learning-based computer-aided diagnosis systems for the classification of mammogram images can help in improving the accuracy, reliability, and cost of diagnosing patients. However, training a deep learning model requires a considerable amount of labelled images, which can be expensive to obtain as time and effort from clinical practitioners are required. To address this, a number of publicly available datasets have been built with data from different hospitals and clinics, which can be used to pre-train the model. However, using models trained on these datasets for later transfer learning and model fine-tuning with images sampled from a different hospital or clinic might result in lower performance. This is due to the distribution mismatch of the datasets, which include different patient populations and image acquisition protocols. In this work, a real-world scenario is evaluated where a novel target dataset sampled from a private Costa Rican clinic is used, with few labels and heavily imbalanced data. The use of two popular and publicly available datasets (INbreast and CBIS-DDSM) as source data, to train and test the models on the novel target dataset, is evaluated. A common approach to further improve the model's performance under such small labelled target dataset setting is data augmentation. However, often cheaper unlabelled data is available from the target clinic. Therefore, semi-supervised deep learning, which leverages both labelled and unlabelled data, can be used in such conditions. In this work, we evaluate the semi-supervised deep learning approach known as MixMatch, to take advantage of unlabelled data from the target dataset, for whole mammogram image classification. We compare the usage of semi-supervised learning on its own, and combined with transfer learning (from a source mammogram dataset) with data augmentation, as also against regular supervised learning with transfer learning and data augmentation from source datasets. It is shown that the use of a semi-supervised deep learning combined with transfer learning and data augmentation can provide a meaningful advantage when using scarce labelled observations. Also, we found a strong influence of the source dataset, which suggests a more data-centric approach needed to tackle the challenge of scarcely labelled data. We used several different metrics to assess the performance gain of using semi-supervised learning, when dealing with very imbalanced test datasets (such as the G-mean and the F2-score), as mammogram datasets are often very imbalanced. Graphical Abstract Description of the test-bed implemented in this work. Two different source data distributions were used to fine-tune the different models tested in this work. The target dataset is the in-house CR-Chavarria-2020 dataset.
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.