ArticleJournal of clinical practice and research2025
Investigation of Binary and Multiclass Classification Performance of Skin Cancer Images Using Transfer Learning Methods.
Article in Journal of clinical practice and research, 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.
- Multimodal skin lesion classification for early cancer diagnosis using deep learning.Frontiers in 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study addresses the skin cancer classification problem using transfer learning, comparing different learning architectures and investigating the effects of pre-processing techniques and hyperparameter tuning on model performance. Materials and Methods: Two datasets were used for binary and multiclass classification tasks. For binary classification, the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) 2019 and 2020 datasets were utilized, while the ISIC 2019 dataset was used for multiclass classification. Pre-processing steps such as DullRazor, Histogram Equalization, and Gamma Correction were applied, along with techniques like data augmentation, early stopping, and learning rate reduction. Results: In binary classification, the ResNet50 model achieved the highest performance with an accuracy of 0.8869 before hyperparameter tuning, while the Visual Geometry Group 16 (VGG16) model outperformed others with an accuracy of 0.9017 after tuning. For multiclass classification, DenseNet121 initially showed the best accuracy of 0.8271 without hyperparameter adjustments. However, after tuning, the VGG16 model again delivered the best performance, achieving an accuracy of 0.9292. Additionally, models such as ResNet50 and MobileNetV2 also demonstrated strong results, confirming the critical role of both pre-processing and hyperparameter optimization in enhancing accuracy. Conclusion: This study demonstrated the effectiveness of transfer learning models combined with pre-processing techniques and hyperparameter tuning for skin cancer classification. Both classification tasks showed significant performance improvements using these methods. The VGG16 model achieved the highest accuracy in both scenarios, highlighting its potential for further development in dermoscopy systems to assist dermatologists in diagnosing skin cancer. Future research should explore a broader range of datasets and refine pre-processing techniques.
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.