ArticleDigital health
Early detection of human Mpox: A comparative study by using machine learning and deep learning models with ensemble approach.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of a Deep Learning System for Detection and Classification of Lumpy Skin Disease in Cattle: Enhancing Precision and Efficiency in Veterinary Diagnostics.Veterinary medicine and science · 2025Article
- Potential role of different animal models for the evaluation of bioactive compounds.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Enhancing Monkeypox Diagnosis with Transformers: Bridging Explainability and Performance with Quantitative Validation.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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to enhance the early diagnosis of Mpox through machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models, integrating an ensemble approach to improve classification accuracy. Methods: We used the Mpox Skin Lesion Dataset v2.0, comprising six skin lesion categories, including chickenpox, cowpox, Mpox, measles, hand-foot-mouth disease, and healthy skin. Four models-Logistic Regression, K-Nearest Neighbors, Vision Transformer (ViT), and ConvMixer-were evaluated based on their classification performance. An ensemble model combining ViT and ConvMixer predictions was developed to further improve accuracy and robustness. Performance metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and AUC were used for evaluation. Results: The ViT model outperformed traditional ML models, achieving 93.03% accuracy in detecting Mpox lesions. The ensemble model further improved diagnostic performance, yielding balanced precision and recall across all lesion categories. The proposed approach demonstrated superior classification accuracy compared to previous studies, highlighting the efficacy of DL-based models in distinguishing Mpox from visually similar conditions. Conclusion: The integration of ML and DL models in an ensemble framework significantly enhances Mpox detection. This AI-driven diagnostic approach offers a scalable, accurate, and efficient solution, particularly in resource-limited settings. Future research will focus on improving model interpretability, federated learning integration, and validation with real-world clinical data.
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.