ArticleScientific reports2025
Fuzzy logic and deep learning approach for automated white blood cell detection and classification via multi-CNN feature fusion.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
White blood cells (WBCs) are vital components of the human immune system, responsible for defending the body against pathogens and infections. The classification and detection of white blood cells (WBC) are indispensable for the diagnosis of hematologic diseases such as leukemia, but manual classification is time-consuming and susceptible to subjectivity. This paper introduces a new framework that integrates multi-CNN feature fusion with fuzzy logic-based Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS) for automatic classification and detection of WBCs. The method combines aspects of DenseNet121, MobileNetV2, and ResNet101 to obtain varied morphological features, tackling intraclass variation and imaging inhomogeneity. A fuzzy EDAS model prioritizes the fused features for better interpretability and robustness in clinical decision-making. Using the Kaggle Blood Cell Images dataset of 8013 images of neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes and lymphocytes, the suggested approach obtained an overall precision of 99.79%, precision, sensitivity and F1 scores greater than 99.70% for all types of WBC. In contrast to individual CNN models (see, e.g., DenseNet121: 95.28%, ResNet101: 81.85%), the combined model performs much better, especially for difficult classes such as neutrophils. The fuzzy EDAS method also guarantees robust model classification in an uncertain situation and is therefore appropriate for clinical settings. It minimizes diagnostic delay, improves scalability in low-resource scenarios, and facilitates quick screening for blood diseases. Future development will address real-time implementation and verification on varied datasets to ensure generalizability.
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.