ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
A comparative study of gastric histopathology sub-size image classification: From linear regression to visual transformer.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- MAP-SCTNet: multi-scale pyramid and frequency-enhanced network for colorectal cancer histopathological image segmentation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Generalized deep learning for histopathology image classification using supervised contrastive learning.Journal of advanced research · 2025Article
- Application of deep learning models in gastric cancer pathology image analysis: a systematic scoping review.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Interpretable deep learning for gastric cancer detection: a fusion of AI architectures and explainability analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Enhanced gastric cancer classification and quantification interpretable framework using digital histopathology images.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Gastric Cancer Image Classification: A Comparative Analysis and Feature Fusion Strategies.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Sleep Stage Classification in Children Using Self-Attention and Gaussian Noise Data Augmentation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- EBHI-Seg: A novel enteroscope biopsy histopathological hematoxylin and eosin image dataset for image segmentation tasks.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- EMDS-7: Environmental microorganism image dataset seventh version for multiple object detection evaluation.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer in the world. At the same time, it is also the fourth most deadly cancer. Early detection of cancer exists as a guide for the treatment of gastric cancer. Nowadays, computer technology has advanced rapidly to assist physicians in the diagnosis of pathological pictures of gastric cancer. Ensemble learning is a way to improve the accuracy of algorithms, and finding multiple learning models with complementarity types is the basis of ensemble learning. Therefore, this paper compares the performance of multiple algorithms in anticipation of applying ensemble learning to a practical gastric cancer classification problem. Methods: The complementarity of sub-size pathology image classifiers when machine performance is insufficient is explored in this experimental platform. We choose seven classical machine learning classifiers and four deep learning classifiers for classification experiments on the GasHisSDB database. Among them, classical machine learning algorithms extract five different image virtual features to match multiple classifier algorithms. For deep learning, we choose three convolutional neural network classifiers. In addition, we also choose a novel Transformer-based classifier. Results: The experimental platform, in which a large number of classical machine learning and deep learning methods are performed, demonstrates that there are differences in the performance of different classifiers on GasHisSDB. Classical machine learning models exist for classifiers that classify Abnormal categories very well, while classifiers that excel in classifying Normal categories also exist. Deep learning models also exist with multiple models that can be complementarity. Discussion: Suitable classifiers are selected for ensemble learning, when machine performance is insufficient. This experimental platform demonstrates that multiple classifiers are indeed complementarity and can improve the efficiency of ensemble learning. This can better assist doctors in diagnosis, improve the detection of gastric cancer, and increase the cure rate.
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.