Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39901085›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2025

Comparative analysis of the DCNN and HFCNN Based Computerized detection of liver cancer.

Sandeep Dwarkanth Pande, Pala Kalyani, S Nagendram, Ala Saleh Alluhaidan, G Harish Babu, Sk Hasane Ahammad, Vivek Kumar Pandey, G Sridevi, Abhinav Kumar, Ebenezer Bonyah

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2025. 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

10 authors.

Sandeep Dwarkanth PandeMIT, academy of Engineering, Alandi, Pune, India. sandeep7887pande@gmail.com.
Pala KalyaniDepartment of ECE, Vardhaman college of Engineering, Hyderabad, India.
S NagendramDepartment of AI, KKR & KSR Institute of Technology & Sciences, Guntur, India.
Ala Saleh AlluhaidanDepartment of Information Systems, College of Computer and Information Science, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh, 11671, Saudi Arabia. asalluhaidan@pnu.edu.sa.
G Harish BabuDepartment of ECE, CVR College of Engineering, Hyderabad, India.
Sk Hasane AhammadDepartment of ECE, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram, 522302, India.
Vivek Kumar PandeyCentre for Research Impact & Outcome, Chitkara University Institute of Engineering and Technology, Chitkara University, Rajpura, 140401, Punjab, India.
G SrideviDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Raghu Engineering College, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, 531162, India.
Abhinav KumarDepartment of Nuclear and Renewable Energy, Ural Federal University Named after the First President of Russia Boris Yeltsin, Ekaterinburg, 620002, Russia.
Ebenezer BonyahDepartment of Mathematics Education, Akenten Appiah Menka University of Skills Training and Entrepreneurial Development, Kumasi, Ghana. eabonyah@aamusted.edu.gh.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liver cancer detection is critically important in the discipline of biomedical image testing and diagnosis. Researchers have explored numerous machine learning (ML) techniques and deep learning (DL) approaches aimed at the automated recognition of liver disease by analysing computed tomography (CT) images. This study compares two frameworks, Deep Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN) and Hierarchical Fusion Convolutional Neural Networks (HFCNN), to assess their effectiveness in liver cancer segmentation. The contribution includes enhancing the edges and textures of CT images through filtering to achieve precise liver segmentation. Additionally, an existing DL framework was employed for liver cancer detection and segmentation. The strengths of this paper include a clear emphasis on the criticality of liver cancer detection in biomedical imaging and diagnostics. It also highlights the challenges associated with CT image detection and segmentation and provides a comprehensive summary of recent literature. However, certain difficulties arise during the detection process in CT images due to overlapping structures, such as bile ducts, blood vessels, image noise, textural changes, size and location variations, and inherent heterogeneity. These factors may lead to segmentation errors and subsequently different analyses. This research analysis compares two advanced methodologies, DCNN and HFCNN, for liver cancer detection. The evaluation of DCNN and HFCNN in liver cancer detection is conducted using multiple performance metrics, including precision, F1-score, recall, and accuracy. This comprehensive assessment provides a detailed evaluation of these models' effectiveness compared to other state-of-the-art methods in identifying liver cancer.

Indexed as

Deep LearningLiver NeoplasmsNeural Networks, ComputerRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedHumansBiomedical image processingDetectionDiagnosisLiver cancerSegmentation

Identifiers

PMID39901085
PMCPMC11792691

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.