ArticlePloS one2025
An explainable and federated deep learning framework for skin cancer diagnosis.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skin cancer (SC) is the most prominent form of cancer in humans, with over 1 million new cases reported worldwide each year. Early identification of SC plays a crucial role in effective treatment. However, protecting patient data privacy is a major concern in medical research. Therefore, this study presents a smart framework for classifying SC leveraging deep learning (DL), federated learning (FL) and explainable AI (XAI). We tested the presented framework on two well-known datasets, ISBI2016 and ISBI2017. The data was first preprocessed by several techniques: resizing, normalization, balancing, and augmentation. Six advanced DL algorithms-VGG16, Xception, DenseNet169, InceptionV3, MobileViT, and InceptionResNetV2-were applied for classification tasks. Among these, the DenseNet169 algorithm obtained the highest accuracy of 83.3% in ISBI2016 and 92.67% in ISBI2017. All models were then tested in an FL platform to maintain data privacy. In the FL platform, the VGG16 algorithm showed the best results, with 92.08% accuracy on ISBI2016 and 94% on ISBI2017. To ensure model interpretability, an XAI-based algorithm named Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME) was used to explain the predictions of the proposed framework. We believe the proposed framework offers a dependable tool for SC diagnosis while protecting sensitive medical 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.