ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Pap Smear Images Classification Using Machine Learning: A Literature Matrix.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Application of artificial intelligence in cervical cytology: a systematic review of deep learning models, datasets, and reported metrics.Frontiers in big data · 2025Pooled it
- Accurate Segmentation of Overlapping Cervical Cells Using an Optimized Deep Learning Framework for Cytology Screening.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Recent advancements in the application of artificial intelligence-based approaches for screening, diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of cervical cancer.Oncology reviews · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence utilization in cancer screening program across ASEAN: a scoping review.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- A New Weighted Deep Learning Feature Using Particle Swarm and Ant Lion Optimization for Cervical Cancer Diagnosis on Pap Smear Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Accuracy Analysis of Deep Learning Methods in Breast Cancer Classification: A Structured Review.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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cervical cancer is regularly diagnosed in women all over the world. This cancer is the seventh most frequent cancer globally and the fourth most prevalent cancer among women. Automated and higher accuracy of cervical cancer classification methods are needed for the early diagnosis of cancer. In addition, this study has proved that routine Pap smears could enhance clinical outcomes by facilitating the early diagnosis of cervical cancer. Liquid-based cytology (LBC)/Pap smears for advanced cervical screening is a highly effective precancerous cell detection technology based on cell image analysis, where cells are classed as normal or abnormal. Computer-aided systems in medical imaging have benefited greatly from extraordinary developments in artificial intelligence (AI) technology. However, resource and computational cost constraints prevent the widespread use of AI-based automation-assisted cervical cancer screening systems. Hence, this paper reviewed the related studies that have been done by previous researchers related to the automation of cervical cancer classification based on machine learning. The objective of this study is to systematically review and analyses the current research on the classification of the cervical using machine learning. The literature that has been reviewed is indexed by Scopus and Web of Science. As a result, for the published paper access until October 2022, this study assessed past approaches for cervical cell classification based on machine learning applications.
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.