Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38687694›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Deep multiple instance learning versus conventional deep single instance learning for interpretable oral cancer detection.

Nadezhda Koriakina, Nataša Sladoje, Vladimir Bašić, Joakim Lindblad

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nadezhda KoriakinaCentre for Image Analysis, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2891-5435
Nataša SladojeCentre for Image Analysis, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Vladimir BašićDepartment of Natural Science and Biomedicine, School of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Jönköping, Sweden.
Joakim LindbladCentre for Image Analysis, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Uppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current medical standard for setting an oral cancer (OC) diagnosis is histological examination of a tissue sample taken from the oral cavity. This process is time-consuming and more invasive than an alternative approach of acquiring a brush sample followed by cytological analysis. Using a microscope, skilled cytotechnologists are able to detect changes due to malignancy; however, introducing this approach into clinical routine is associated with challenges such as a lack of resources and experts. To design a trustworthy OC detection system that can assist cytotechnologists, we are interested in deep learning based methods that can reliably detect cancer, given only per-patient labels (thereby minimizing annotation bias), and also provide information regarding which cells are most relevant for the diagnosis (thereby enabling supervision and understanding). In this study, we perform a comparison of two approaches suitable for OC detection and interpretation: (i) conventional single instance learning (SIL) approach and (ii) a modern multiple instance learning (MIL) method. To facilitate systematic evaluation of the considered approaches, we, in addition to a real OC dataset with patient-level ground truth annotations, also introduce a synthetic dataset-PAP-QMNIST. This dataset shares several properties of OC data, such as image size and large and varied number of instances per bag, and may therefore act as a proxy model of a real OC dataset, while, in contrast to OC data, it offers reliable per-instance ground truth, as defined by design. PAP-QMNIST has the additional advantage of being visually interpretable for non-experts, which simplifies analysis of the behavior of methods. For both OC and PAP-QMNIST data, we evaluate performance of the methods utilizing three different neural network architectures. Our study indicates, somewhat surprisingly, that on both synthetic and real data, the performance of the SIL approach is better or equal to the performance of the MIL approach. Visual examination by cytotechnologist indicates that the methods manage to identify cells which deviate from normality, including malignant cells as well as those suspicious for dysplasia. We share the code as open source.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMouth NeoplasmsHumansNeural Networks, Computer

Identifiers

PMID38687694
PMCPMC11060593
OpenAlexW4396515572

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.