Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39444398›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

MIDC: Medical image dataset cleaning framework based on deep learning.

Sanli Yi, Ziyan Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Sanli YiSchool of Information Engineering and Automation, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, 650500, China.
Ziyan ChenSchool of Information Engineering and Automation, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, 650500, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning technology is widely used in the field of medical imaging. Among them, Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are the most widely used, and the quality of the dataset is crucial for the training of CNN diagnostic models, as mislabeled data can easily affect the accuracy of the diagnostic models. However, due to medical specialization, it is difficult for non-professional physicians to judge mislabeled medical image data. In this paper, we proposed a new framework named medical image dataset cleaning (MIDC), whose main contribution is to improve the quality of public datasets by automatically cleaning up mislabeled data. The main innovations of MIDC are: firstly, the framework innovatively utilizes multiple public datasets of the same disease, relying on different CNNs to automatically recognize images and remove mislabeled data to complete the data cleaning process. This process does not rely on annotations from professional physicians and does not require additional datasets with more reliable labels; Secondly, a novel grading rule is designed to divide the datasets into high-accuracy datasets and low-accuracy datasets, based on which the data cleaning process can be performed; Thirdly, a novel data cleaning module based on CNN is designed to identify and clean low-accuracy datasets by using high-accuracy datasets. In the experiments, the validity of the proposed framework was verified by using four kinds of datasets diabetic retinal, viral pneumonia, breast tumor, and skin cancer, with results showing an increase in the average diagnostic accuracy from 71.18 % to 85.13 %, 82.50 %to 93.79 %, 85.59 %to 93.45 %, and 84.55 %to 94.21 %, respectively. The proposed data cleaning framework MIDC could better help physicians diagnose diseases based on the dataset with mislabeled data.

Indexed as

Classification accuracyData cleaningDeep learningMislabeled dataPublic medical datasets

Identifiers

PMID39444398
PMCPMC11497395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.