ArticleScientific reports2023
Deep learning and ultrasound feature fusion model predicts the malignancy of complex cystic and solid breast nodules with color Doppler images.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating the diagnostic pitfalls of cystic and solid breast masses: a comparative case report of metaplastic carcinoma and benign lesions.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- The value of contrast-enhanced energy-spectrum mammography combined with clinical indicators in detecting breast cancer in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 lesions.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Combined clinical variable and radiomics of post-treatment total body scan for prediction of successful I-131 ablation in low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma patients.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the performance of traditional-deep learning combination model based on Doppler ultrasound for diagnosing malignant complex cystic and solid breast nodules. A conventional statistical prediction model based on the ultrasound features and basic clinical information was established. A deep learning prediction model was used to train the training group images and derive the deep learning prediction model. The two models were validated, and their accuracy rates were compared using the data and images of the test group, respectively. A logistic regression method was used to combine the two models to derive a combination diagnostic model and validate it in the test group. The diagnostic performance of each model was represented by the receiver operating characteristic curve and the area under the curve. In the test cohort, the diagnostic efficacy of the deep learning model was better than traditional statistical model, and the combined diagnostic model was better and outperformed the other two models (combination model vs traditional statistical model: AUC: 0.95 > 0.70, P = 0.001; combination model vs deep learning model: AUC: 0.95 > 0.87, P = 0.04). A combination model based on deep learning and ultrasound features has good diagnostic value.
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.