ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of performance of cervical cancer grading based on acetowhite areas.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predictive modeling for cervical cancer: existing AI approaches and the emerging role of vaginal microbiome.Frontiers in network physiology · 2026Article
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
Cervical cancer ranks fourth globally in terms of both incidence and mortality among women, making timely diagnosis essential for effective treatment. Although the acetowhite regions and their margins are important for cervical cancer staging, their potential for automated cancer grading remains underexplored. This study aimed to enhance diagnostic accuracy and grading precision by effectively analyzing the acetowhite region and its surroundings. Using four classifiers (Logistic Regression(LR), Random Forest(RF), XGBoost(XGB), and Support Vector Machine(SVM)), 464 cervical images (228 atypical and 236 positive cases) were analyzed. From a set of 75 features, the classifiers identified the top 5 based on feature importance. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis yielded the following precisions for models trained with masks containing only the acetowhite lesion: LR 0.80 (CI 95% 0.70-0.90), SVM 0.83 (CI 95% 0.75-0.92), RF 0.79 (CI 95% 0.69-0.89), XGB 0.66 (CI 95% 0.55-0.77). For models trained with masks including the acetowhite lesion and a 10-pixel margin: LR 0.79 (CI 95% 0.70-0.88), SVM 0.87 (CI 95% 0.78-0.95), RF 0.86 (CI 95% 0.77-0.94), XGB 0.84 (CI 95% 0.75-0.93). Our findings indicate that including a 10-pixel margin around acetowhite lesions improves classifier performance, suggesting its advantage in the automated classification of cervical images.
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.