ArticlePloS one2026
Research on the establishment of a four-classification model for breast mass ultrasound images based on transfer learning.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast mass classification via ultrasound is critical for early diagnosis but remains challenging due to overlapping morphological features. This study evaluates the efficacy of optimized transfer learning (TL) based on deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) in distinguishing four breast mass categories: invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), fibroadenoma (FA), mucinous carcinoma (MC), and inflammatory mass (IM). Our approach comprises four key steps: (1) applying extensive data augmentation to a retrospective dataset of 346 ultrasound images from 294 patients (November 2021-March 2023) classified by pathological confirmation; (2) implementing transfer learning with five pretrained DCNN models (ResNet18, ResNet50, DenseNet121, MobileNetV2, GoogLeNet); (3) optimizing model hyperparameters for four-class classification; (4) comparing performance metrics (accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, AUC-ROC) against two senior radiologists (8- and 10-years' experience) on a held-out test set. Results: The DenseNet121 and GoogLeNet models demonstrated superior overall accuracy (0.912 and 0.926, respectively), significantly outperforming the radiologists' consensus (0.691) (p < 0.01). In class-specific analysis, the optimized models achieved notably higher accuracy for IDC, MC, and IM. Statistical testing confirmed the significant performance improvement of the top models over human experts. Optimized TL with DCNNs, particularly DenseNet121 and GoogLeNet, enables highly accurate four-class breast mass classification in ultrasound images, surpassing expert radiologist performance with statistical significance. This approach holds promise for clinical decision support. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/jinlao777/BCC.
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.