Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37547396›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2023

Diagnostic efficiency of multi-modal MRI based deep learning with Sobel operator in differentiating benign and malignant breast mass lesions-a retrospective study.

Weixia Tang, Ming Zhang, Changyan Xu, Yeqin Shao, Jiahuan Tang, Shenchu Gong, Hao Dong, Meihong Sheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. The Evolution and Clinical Impact of Deep Learning Technologies in Breast MRI.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Review
  4. 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

8 authors.

Weixia Tang *Radiology Department, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong First People's Hospital, NanTong, Jiangsu, China.
Ming Zhang *Radiology Department, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong First People's Hospital, NanTong, Jiangsu, China.
Changyan XuSchool of Transportation and Civil Engineering, Nantong University, Nantong, China.
Yeqin ShaoSchool of Transportation and Civil Engineering, Nantong University, Nantong, China.
Jiahuan TangRadiology Department, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong First People's Hospital, NanTong, Jiangsu, China.
Shenchu GongRadiology Department, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong First People's Hospital, NanTong, Jiangsu, China.
Hao DongDepartment of Research Collaboration, R&D Center, Beijing Deepwise & League of PHD Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China.
Meihong ShengRadiology Department, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong First People's Hospital, NanTong, Jiangsu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic efficiencies of deep learning single-modal and multi-modal for the classification of benign and malignant breast mass lesions. Methods: We retrospectively collected data from 203 patients (207 lesions, 101 benign and 106 malignant) with breast tumors who underwent breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before surgery or biopsy between January 2014 and October 2020. Mass segmentation was performed based on the three dimensions-region of interest (3D-ROI) minimum bounding cube at the edge of the lesion. We established single-modal models based on a convolutional neural network (CNN) including T2WI and non-fs T1WI, the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE-MRI) first phase was pre-contrast T1WI (d1), and Phases 2, 4, and 6 were post-contrast T1WI (d2, d4, d6); and Multi-modal fusion models with a Sobel operator (four_mods:T2WI, non-fs-T1WI, d1, d2). Training set ( Results: All models showed good performance, and the AUC values were all greater than 0.750. Among the single-modal models, T2WI, non-fs-T1WI, d1, and d2 had specificities of 77.1%, 77.2%, 80.2%, and 78.2%, respectively. d2 had the highest accuracy of 78.5% and showed the best diagnostic performance with an AUC of 0.827. The multi-modal model with the Sobel operator performed better than single-modal models, with an AUC of 0.887, sensitivity of 79.8%, specificity of 86.1%, and positive prediction value of 85.6%. Delong's test showed that the diagnostic performance of the multi-modal fusion models was higher than that of the six single-modal models (T2WI, non-fs-T1WI, d1, d2, d4, d6); the difference was statistically significant ( Conclusions: Multi-modal fusion deep learning models with a Sobel operator had excellent diagnostic value in the classification of breast masses, and further increase the efficiency of diagnosis.

Indexed as

BreastDeep learningMagnetic resonanceMassMulti-modalSobel operator

Identifiers

PMID37547396
PMCPMC10403185

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.