ArticlePloS one2022
A Novel CNN pooling layer for breast cancer segmentation and classification from thermograms.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound for predicting pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Application of deep learning technology in breast cancer: a systematic review of segmentation, detection, and classification approaches.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Robust Activity Recognition via Redundancy-Aware CNNs and Novel Pooling for Noisy Mobile Sensor Data.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Analysis of breast region segmentation in thermal images using U-Net deep neural network variants.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Article
- What Is Machine Learning, Artificial Neural Networks and Deep Learning?-Examples of Practical Applications in Medicine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer is the second most frequent cancer worldwide, following lung cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer death and a major cause of cancer death among women. In recent years, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have been successfully applied for the diagnosis of breast cancer using different imaging modalities. Pooling is a main data processing step in CNN that decreases the feature maps' dimensionality without losing major patterns. However, the effect of pooling layer was not studied efficiently in literature. In this paper, we propose a novel design for the pooling layer called vector pooling block (VPB) for the CCN algorithm. The proposed VPB consists of two data pathways, which focus on extracting features along horizontal and vertical orientations. The VPB makes the CNNs able to collect both global and local features by including long and narrow pooling kernels, which is different from the traditional pooling layer, that gathers features from a fixed square kernel. Based on the novel VPB, we proposed a new pooling module called AVG-MAX VPB. It can collect informative features by using two types of pooling techniques, maximum and average pooling. The VPB and the AVG-MAX VPB are plugged into the backbone CNNs networks, such as U-Net, AlexNet, ResNet18 and GoogleNet, to show the advantages in segmentation and classification tasks associated with breast cancer diagnosis from thermograms. The proposed pooling layer was evaluated using a benchmark thermogram database (DMR-IR) and its results compared with U-Net results which was used as base results. The U-Net results were as follows: global accuracy = 96.6%, mean accuracy = 96.5%, mean IoU = 92.07%, and mean BF score = 78.34%. The VBP-based results were as follows: global accuracy = 98.3%, mean accuracy = 97.9%, mean IoU = 95.87%, and mean BF score = 88.68% while the AVG-MAX VPB-based results were as follows: global accuracy = 99.2%, mean accuracy = 98.97%, mean IoU = 98.03%, and mean BF score = 94.29%. Other network architectures also demonstrate superior improvement considering the use of VPB and AVG-MAX VPB.
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.