ReviewHeliyon2023
Usefulness of machine learning and deep learning approaches in screening and early detection of breast cancer.
Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cuproptosis-Related Gene FDX1 Induces Malignant Progression and Immune Suppression in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.Biochemical genetics · 2026Article
- BrCaM an artificial intelligence model for surgical decision making in breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A multi-scale hybrid ResNet-transformer with distance-aware learning for interpretable BI-RADS mammographic classification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of genetic variation in tumor suppressor miRNA encoding and their target genes in breast cancer; focus on miRNA interaction and expression analysis.Frontiers in genome editing · 2026Article
- Exploring the Role of Long Noncoding RNAs in Breast Cancer Progression: A Comprehensive Study on Biomarkers and Therapeutic Approaches.Cancer medicine · 2026Review
- The role of AI for improved management of breast cancer: Enhanced diagnosis and health disparity mitigation.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine · 2025Review
- Association between VEGF gene polymorphisms and breast cancer risk.Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2025Article
- A hybrid deep learning model EfficientNet with GRU for breast cancer detection from histopathology images.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- SIAH2-AS1 stimulates breast cancer cell proliferation and migration via the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The expression of the lncRNAs USP30-AS1, ELFN1-AS1, GAS8-AS1, and SNHG11 in breast cancer samples from Iranian patients from 2014 to 2019: a cross-sectional study.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based prediction of nasopharyngeal carcinoma risk: a clinical approach.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- MRI-based radiomic and machine learning for prediction of lymphovascular invasion status in breast cancer.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- DVF-YOLO-Seg: A two-stage breast mass segmentation model with enhanced feature extraction and small lesion detection.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) is one of the most common types of cancer in women, and its prevalence is on the rise. The diagnosis of this disease in the first steps can be highly challenging. Hence, early and rapid diagnosis of this disease in its early stages increases the likelihood of a patient's recovery and survival. This study presents a systematic and detailed analysis of the various ML approaches and mechanisms employed during the BC diagnosis process. Further, this study provides a comprehensive and accurate overview of techniques, approaches, challenges, solutions, and important concepts related to this process in order to provide healthcare professionals and technologists with a deeper understanding of new screening and diagnostic tools and approaches, as well as identify new challenges and popular approaches in this field. Therefore, this study has attempted to provide a comprehensive taxonomy of applying ML techniques to BC diagnosis, focusing on the data obtained from the clinical methods diagnosis. The taxonomy presented in this study has two major components. Clinical diagnostic methods such as MRI, mammography, and hybrid methods are presented in the first part of the taxonomy. The second part involves implementing machine learning approaches such as neural networks (NN), deep learning (DL), and hybrid on the dataset in the first part. Then, the taxonomy will be analyzed based on implementing ML approaches in clinical diagnosis methods. The findings of the study demonstrated that the approaches based on NN and DL are the most accurate and widely used models for BC diagnosis compared to other diagnostic techniques, and accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SEN), and specificity (SPE) are the most commonly used performance evaluation criteria. Additionally, factors such as the advantages and disadvantages of using machine learning techniques, as well as the objectives of each research, separately for ML technology and BC detection, as well as evaluation criteria, are discussed in this study. Lastly, this study provides an overview of open and unresolved issues related to using ML for BC diagnosis, along with a proposal to resolve each issue to assist researchers and healthcare professionals.
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.