ArticleBreast disease2024
Parametric optimization and comparative study of machine learning and deep learning algorithms for breast cancer diagnosis.
Article in Breast disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mortality Prediction from Patient's First Day PAAC Radiograph in Internal Medicine Intensive Care Unit Using Artificial Intelligence Methods.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A comparative analysis of parametric survival models and machine learning methods in breast cancer prognosis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
Breast Cancer is the leading form of cancer found in women and a major cause of increased mortality rates among them. However, manual diagnosis of the disease is time-consuming and often limited by the availability of screening systems. Thus, there is a pressing need for an automatic diagnosis system that can quickly detect cancer in its early stages. Data mining and machine learning techniques have emerged as valuable tools in developing such a system. In this study we investigated the performance of several machine learning models on the Wisconsin Breast Cancer (original) dataset with a particular emphasis on finding which models perform the best for breast cancer diagnosis. The study also explores the contrast between the proposed ANN methodology and conventional machine learning techniques. The comparison between the methods employed in the current study and those utilized in earlier research on the Wisconsin Breast Cancer dataset is also compared. The findings of this study are in line with those of previous studies which also highlighted the efficacy of SVM, Decision Tree, CART, ANN, and ELM ANN for breast cancer detection. Several classifiers achieved high accuracy, precision and F1 scores for benign and malignant tumours, respectively. It is also found that models with hyperparameter adjustment performed better than those without and boosting methods like as XGBoost, Adaboost, and Gradient Boost consistently performed well across benign and malignant tumours. The study emphasizes the significance of hyperparameter tuning and the efficacy of boosting algorithms in addressing the complexity and nonlinearity of data. Using the Wisconsin Breast Cancer (original) dataset, a detailed summary of the current status of research on breast cancer diagnosis is provided.
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.