Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38796546›Full record

ArticleArchives of dermatological research2024

Automated Prediction of Malignant Melanoma using Two-Stage Convolutional Neural Network.

J Angeline, A Siva Kailash, J Karthikeyan, R Karthika, Vijayalakshmi Saravanan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

J AngelineDepartment of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Amrita School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore, India.
A Siva KailashDepartment of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Amrita School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore, India.
J KarthikeyanDepartment of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Amrita School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore, India.
R KarthikaDepartment of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Amrita School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore, India. r_karthika@cb.amrita.edu.
Vijayalakshmi SaravananDepartment of Computer Science, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA skin lesion refers to an area of the skin that exhibits anomalous growth or distinctive visual characteristics compared to the surrounding skin. Benign skin lesions are noncancerous and generally pose no threat. These irregular skin growths can vary in appearance. On the other hand, malignant skin lesions correspond to skin cancer, which happens to be the most prevalent form of cancer in the United States. Skin cancer involves the unusual proliferation of skin cells anywhere on the body. The conventional method for detecting skin cancer is relatively more painful.

methodsThis work involves the automated prediction of skin cancer and its types using two stage Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). The first stage of CNN extracts low level features and second stage extracts high level features. Feature selection is done using these two CNN and ABCD (Asymmetry, Border irregularity, Colour variation, and Diameter) technique. The features extracted from the two CNNs are fused with ABCD features and fed into classifiers for the final prediction. The classifiers employed in this work include ensemble learning methods such as gradient boosting and XG boost, as well as machine learning classifiers like decision trees and logistic regression. This methodology is evaluated using the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) 2018 and 2019 dataset.

resultsAs a result, the first stage CNN which is used for creation of new dataset achieved an accuracy of 97.92%. Second stage CNN which is used for feature selection achieved an accuracy of 98.86%. Classification results are obtained for both with and without fusion of features.

conclusionTherefore, two stage prediction model achieved better results with feature fusion.

Indexed as

MelanomaNeural Networks, ComputerSkin NeoplasmsCutaneous Malignant MelanomaDeep LearningDermoscopyHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMachine LearningSkinABCDBenignConvolutional neural networkFeature fusionFeature selectionLesionMalignantMelanoma

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.