ArticleOsong public health and research perspectives2024
BCED-Net: Breast Cancer Ensemble Diagnosis Network using transfer learning and the XGBoost classifier with mammography images.
Article in Osong public health and research perspectives, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The predictive value of multiple artificial intelligence models in axillary lymph node metastasis of breast cancer detected by ultrasound - a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence Pipeline for Mammography-Based Breast Cancer Detection: An Integrated Systematic Review and Large-Scale Experimental Validation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- A cross data learning architecture for breast cancer classification using mammograms.Biomedical signal processing and control · 2026Article
- Self-knowledge distillation for prediction of breast cancer molecular subtypes based on digital breast tomosynthesis.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer poses a significant global health challenge, characterized by complex origins and the potential for life-threatening metastasis. The critical need for early and accurate detection is underscored by the 685,000 lives claimed by the disease worldwide in 2020. Deep learning has made strides in advancing the prompt diagnosis of breast cancer. However, obstacles persist, such as dealing with high-dimensional data and the risk of overfitting, necessitating fresh approaches to improve accuracy and real-world applicability.
methodsIn response to these challenges, we propose BCED-Net, which stands for Breast Cancer Ensemble Diagnosis Network. This innovative framework leverages transfer learning and the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) classifier on the Breast Cancer RSNA dataset. Our methodology involved feature extraction using pre-trained models-namely, Resnet50, EfficientnetB3, VGG19, Densenet121, and ConvNeXtTiny-followed by the concatenation of the extracted features. Our most promising configuration combined features extracted from deep convolutional neural networks-namely Resnet50, EfficientnetB3, and ConvNeXtTiny-that were classified using the XGBoost classifier.
resultsThe ensemble approach demonstrated strong overall performance with an accuracy of 0.89. The precision, recall, and F1-score values, which were all at 0.86, highlight a balanced trade-off between correctly identified positive instances and the ability to capture all actual positive samples.
conclusionBCED-Net represents a significant leap forward in addressing persistent issues such as the high dimensionality of features and the risk of overfitting.
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.