Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39779772›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Boosting skin cancer diagnosis accuracy with ensemble approach.

Priya Natha, Sivarama Prasad Tera, Ravikumar Chinthaginjala, Safia Obaidur Rab, C Venkata Narasimhulu, Tae Hoon Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

6 authors.

Priya NathaDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Green Fields, Vaddeswaram, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, 522302, India.
Sivarama Prasad TeraDepartment of Electronics and Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India.
Ravikumar ChinthaginjalaSchool of Electronics Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632014, India. cvrkvit@gmail.com.
Safia Obaidur RabDepartment of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, College of Applied Medical Science, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
C Venkata NarasimhuluDepartment of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Chaitanya Bharati Institute of Technology, Hyderabad, 500075, India.
Tae Hoon KimSchool of Information and Electronic Engineering and Zhejiang Key Laboratory of Biomedical Intelligent Computing Technology, Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, No. 318, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China. 323020@zust.edu.cn.

Funding

The authors are thankful to the Deanship of Research and Graduate Studies, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia, for financially supporting this work through the Large Research Group Project under Grant no. R.G.P.2/44/45 R.G.P.2/44/45the National Natural Science Youth Science Foundation Project 62201508The research is partially funded by Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation Youth Fund Project LQ23F010004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skin cancer is common and deadly, hence a correct diagnosis at an early age is essential. Effective therapy depends on precise classification of the several skin cancer forms, each with special traits. Because dermoscopy and other sophisticated imaging methods produce detailed lesion images, early detection has been enhanced. It's still difficult to analyze the images to differentiate benign from malignant tumors, though. Better predictive modeling methods are needed since the diagnostic procedures used now frequently produce inaccurate and inconsistent results. In dermatology, Machine learning (ML) models are becoming essential for the automatic detection and classification of skin cancer lesions from image data. With the ensemble model, which mix several ML approaches to take use of their advantages and lessen their disadvantages, this work seeks to improve skin cancer predictions. We introduce a new method, the Max Voting method, for optimization of skin cancer classification. On the HAM10000 and ISIC 2018 datasets, we trained and assessed three distinct ML models: Random Forest (RF), Multi-layer Perceptron Neural Network (MLPN), and Support Vector Machine (SVM). Overall performance was increased by the combined predictions made with the Max Voting technique. Moreover, feature vectors that were optimally produced from image data by a Genetic Algorithm (GA) were given to the ML models. We demonstrate that the Max Voting method greatly improves predictive performance, reaching an accuracy of 94.70% and producing the best results for F1-measure, recall, and precision. The most dependable and robust approach turned out to be Max Voting, which combines the benefits of numerous pre-trained ML models to provide a new and efficient method for classifying skin cancer lesions.

Indexed as

Machine LearningSkin NeoplasmsSupport Vector MachineAlgorithmsDermoscopyHumansNeural Networks, ComputerEnsemble modelHAM10000 datasetISIC 2018 datasetMachine learning (ML)Max Voting methodMulti-class skin cancer classificationMulti-layer perceptron neural network (MLPN)Random forest (RF)Support vector machine (SVM)

Identifiers

PMID39779772
PMCPMC11711234

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.