ArticleJournal of imaging2025
Enhancing Breast Lesion Detection in Mammograms via Transfer Learning.
Article in Journal of imaging, 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.
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
Abstract
Early detection of breast cancer via mammography enhances patient survival rates, prompting this study to assess object detection models-Cascade R-CNN, YOLOv12 (S, L, and X variants), RTMDet-X, and RT-DETR-X-for detecting masses and calcifications across four public datasets (INbreast, CBIS-DDSM, VinDr-Mammo, and EMBED). The evaluation employs a standardized preprocessing approach (CLAHE, cropping) and augmentation (rotations, scaling), with transfer learning tested by training on combined datasets (e.g., INbreast + CBIS-DDSM) and validating on held-out sets (e.g., VinDr-Mammo). Performance is measured using precision, recall, mean Average Precision at IoU 0.5 (mAP50), and F1-score. YOLOv12-L excels in mass detection with an mAP50 of 0.963 and F1-score up to 0.917 on INbreast, while RTMDet-X achieves an mAP50 of 0.697 on combined datasets with transfer learning. Preprocessing improves mAP50 by up to 0.209, and transfer learning elevates INbreast performance to an mAP50 of 0.995, though it incurs 5-11% drops on CBIS-DDSM (0.566 to 0.447) and VinDr-Mammo (0.59 to 0.5) due to domain shifts. EMBED yields a low mAP50 of 0.306 due to label inconsistencies, and calcification detection remains weak (mAP50 < 0.116), highlighting the value of high-capacity models, preprocessing, and augmentation for mass detection while identifying calcification detection and domain adaptation as key areas for future investigation.
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.