ArticleScientific reports2025
Identification of cancerous tissues based on residual neural network.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The identification of cancerous tissues remains challenging due to the complexity of experimental methods and low identification accuracy rates. Therefore, this paper proposes a rapid identification method. We introduce a new theoretical transmission method for modeling laser beams transport in cancerous and normal biological tissues. Using this method, laser speckle patterns carrying tissue information are obtained at the light transmission receiving plane. Then, we propose a three-task residual neural network, T-ResNet-18, for identifying speckle images. We simulate the human normal and cancerous prostate tissues, rat normal and cancerous tissues, and normal and abnormal cell suspension as training samples. The results show the identification accuracy exceeding 99%. Additionally, we discuss the impact of varying dataset sizes, training epochs, and tissue thickness on identification accuracy and compare the performance of T-ResNet-18 with ResNet-18, VGG16 and AlexNet, showing that T-ResNet-18 significantly outperforms classic neural networks.
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.