ArticleScientific reports2024
Skin cancer classification based on an optimized convolutional neural network and multicriteria decision-making.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effective skin cancer classification by modified and optimized inception-ResNet-V2 model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Multi-stage knowledge distillation with layer fusion-based deep learning approach for skin cancer classification.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Multimodal dual-stage feature refinement for robust skin lesion classification.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Melanoma Skin Cancer Recognition with a Convolutional Neural Network and Feature Dimensions Reduction with Aquila Optimizer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A skin disease classification model based on multi scale combined efficient channel attention module.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Skin Cancer Image Classification Using Artificial Intelligence Strategies: A Systematic Review.Journal of imaging · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skin cancer is a type of cancer disease in which abnormal alterations in skin characteristics can be detected. It can be treated if it is detected early. Many artificial intelligence-based models have been developed for skin cancer detection and classification. Considering the development of numerous models according to various scenarios and selecting the optimum model was rarely considered in previous works. This study aimed to develop various models for skin cancer classification and select the optimum model. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in the form of AlexNet, Inception V3, MobileNet V2, and ResNet 50 were used for feature extraction. Feature reduction was carried out using two algorithms of the grey wolf optimizer (GWO) in addition to using the original features. Skin cancer images were classified into four classes based on six machine learning (ML) classifiers. As a result, 51 models were developed with different combinations of CNN algorithms, without GWO algorithms, with two GWO algorithms, and with six ML classifiers. To select the optimum model with the best results, the multicriteria decision-making approach was utilized to rank the alternatives by perimeter similarity (RAPS). Model training and testing were conducted using the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) 2017 dataset. Based on nine evaluation metrics and according to the RAPS method, the AlexNet algorithm with a classical GWO yielded the optimum model, achieving a classification accuracy of 94.5%. This work presents the first study on benchmarking skin cancer classification with many models. Feature reduction not only reduces the time spent on training but also improves classification accuracy. The RAPS method has proven its robustness in the problem of selecting the best model for skin cancer classification.
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.