ArticleJournal of imaging2024
Improved Loss Function for Mass Segmentation in Mammography Images Using Density and Mass Size.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- MB-SwinRefiner: Mammographic Mass Segmentation with Probability-Guided Residual Refinement.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mass segmentation is one of the fundamental tasks used when identifying breast cancer due to the comprehensive information it provides, including the location, size, and border of the masses. Despite significant improvement in the performance of the task, certain properties of the data, such as pixel class imbalance and the diverse appearance and sizes of masses, remain challenging. Recently, there has been a surge in articles proposing to address pixel class imbalance through the formulation of the loss function. While demonstrating an enhancement in performance, they mostly fail to address the problem comprehensively. In this paper, we propose a new perspective on the calculation of the loss that enables the binary segmentation loss to incorporate the sample-level information and region-level losses in a hybrid loss setting. We propose two variations of the loss to include mass size and density in the loss calculation. Also, we introduce a single loss variant using the idea of utilizing mass size and density to enhance focal loss. We tested the proposed method on benchmark datasets: CBIS-DDSM and INbreast. Our approach outperformed the baseline and state-of-the-art methods on both datasets.
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.