Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35445152›Full record

ArticleProceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems2021

A Deep Clustering Method For Analyzing Uterine Cervix Images Across Imaging Devices.

Zhiyun Xue, Peng Guo, Kanan T Desai, Anabik Pal, Kayode O Ajenifuja, Clement A Adepiti, L Rodney Long, Mark Schiffman, Sameer Antani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Data Characterization for Reliable AI in Medicine.Recent trends in image processing and pattern recognition : 5th International Conference, RTIP2R 2022, Kingsville, TX, USA, December 01-02, 2022, revised selected papers. International Conference on Recent Trends in Image Processing and... · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. A unified set of analysis tools for uterine cervix image segmentation.Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society · 2010
    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

9 authors.

Zhiyun XueNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA.
Peng GuoNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA.
Kanan T DesaiNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, USA.
Anabik PalNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA.
Kayode O AjenifujaObafemi Awolowo University, Nigeria.
Clement A AdepitiObafemi Awolowo University, Nigeria.
L Rodney LongNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA.
Mark SchiffmanNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, USA.
Sameer AntaniNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 LM999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid (VIA), though error prone, has long been used for screening women and to guide management for cervical cancer. The automated visual evaluation (AVE) technique, in which deep learning is used to predict precancer based on a digital image of the acetowhitened cervix, has demonstrated its promise as a low-cost method to improve on human performance. However, there are several challenges in moving AVE beyond proof-of-concept and deploying it as a practical adjunct tool in visual screening. One of them is making AVE robust across images captured using different devices. We propose a new deep learning based clustering approach to investigate whether the images taken by three different devices (a common smartphone, a custom smartphone-based handheld device for cervical imaging, and a clinical colposcope equipped with SLR digital camera-based imaging capability) can be well distinguished from each other with respect to the visual appearance/content within their cervix regions. We argue that disparity in visual appearance of a cervix across devices could be a significant confounding factor in training and generalizing AVE performance. Our method consists of four components: cervix region detection, feature extraction, feature encoding, and clustering. Multiple experiments are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of each component and compare alternative methods in each component. Our proposed method achieves high clustering accuracy (97%) and significantly outperforms several representative deep clustering methods on our dataset. The high clustering performance indicates the images taken from these three devices are different with respect to visual appearance. Our results and analysis establish a need for developing a method that minimizes such variance among the images acquired from different devices. It also recognizes the need for large number of training images from different sources for robust device-independent AVE performance worldwide.

Indexed as

automated visual inspectioncervical cancer screeningdeep clusteringtransfer learning

Identifiers

PMID35445152
PMCPMC9017785

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.