ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024
A Systematic Review of Real-Time Deep Learning Methods for Image-Based Cancer Diagnostics.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnosis methods for pancreatic cancer with the technique of deep learning: a review and a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Development and Validation of a Multi-Omics Model Integrating US-Derived and WSI-Based Features to Predict Lymph Node Metastasis in Ovarian Cancer: A Multi-Center Retrospective Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Deep learning in nuclear medicine: from imaging to therapy.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Review
- Evaluation of deep learning tools in medical diagnosis and treatment of cancer: research analysis of clinical and randomized clinical trials.Frontiers in network physiology · 2025Review
- ELW-CNN: An extremely lightweight convolutional neural network for enhancing interoperability in colon and lung cancer identification using explainable AI.Healthcare technology lettersArticle
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
Deep Learning (DL) drives academics to create models for cancer diagnosis using medical image processing because of its innate ability to recognize difficult-to-detect patterns in complex, noisy, and massive data. The use of deep learning algorithms for real-time cancer diagnosis is explored in depth in this work. Real-time medical diagnosis determines the illness or condition that accounts for a patient's symptoms and outward physical manifestations within a predetermined time frame. With a waiting period of anywhere between 5 days and 30 days, there are currently several ways, including screening tests, biopsies, and other prospective methods, that can assist in discovering a problem, particularly cancer. This article conducts a thorough literature review to understand how DL affects the length of this waiting period. In addition, the accuracy and turnaround time of different imaging modalities is evaluated with DL-based cancer diagnosis. Convolutional neural networks are critical for real-time cancer diagnosis, with models achieving up to 99.3% accuracy. The effectiveness and cost of the infrastructure required for real-time image-based medical diagnostics are evaluated. According to the report, generalization problems, data variability, and explainable DL are some of the most significant barriers to using DL in clinical trials. Making DL applicable for cancer diagnosis will be made possible by explainable DL.
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.