ArticleScientific reports2024
Classification of melanoma skin Cancer based on Image Data Set using different neural networks.
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.
- R3MV: a novel reliable system architecture for skin cancer classification using progressive heterogeneous multiblock model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Transformer-aided skin cancer classification using VGG19-based feature encoding.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Validation of a Dermatology-Focused Multimodal Large Language Model in Classification of Pigmented Skin Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- An Improved Capsule Network for Image Classification Using Multi-Scale Feature Extraction.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Enhanced early skin cancer detection through fusion of vision transformer and CNN features using hybrid attention of EViT-Dens169.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Transfer Learning-Based Ensemble of CNNs and Vision Transformers for Accurate Melanoma Diagnosis and Image Retrieval.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper aims to address the pressing issue of melanoma classification by leveraging advanced neural network models, specifically basic Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), ResNet-18, and EfficientNet-B0. Our objectives encompass presenting and evaluating these models based on established practices in medical image diagnosis. Additionally, we aim to demonstrate their effectiveness in contributing to the critical task of saving lives through early and accurate melanoma diagnosis.Our methodology involves a multi-stage process, which includes image normalization and augmentation, followed by segmentation, feature extraction, and classification. Notably, the neural network models underwent rigorous evaluation, with EfficientNet-B0 exhibiting exceptional performance as the winning model. EfficientNet-B0 achieved a remarkable accuracy of 97%, surpassing ResNet-18 (87%) and basic CNN (80%) in classifying malignant and benign cases. In addition to accuracy, a comprehensive set of evaluation metrics was employed for EfficientNet-B0: sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 93%, F1-score of 97%, precision of 95%, and an error rate of 3%. It also demonstrated a Mathew's correlation coefficient of 94% and a geometric mean of 1.01. Across these metrics, EfficientNet-B0 consistently outperformed ResNet-18 and basic CNN. The findings from this research suggest that neural network models, particularly EfficientNet-B0, hold significant promise for precise and efficient melanoma skin cancer detection.
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.