ArticleCancers2025
Mammogram Analysis with YOLO Models on an Affordable Embedded System.
Article in Cancers, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesBreast cancer persists as a leading cause of female mortality globally. Mammograms are a key screening tool for early detection, although many resource-limited hospitals lack access to skilled radiologists and advanced diagnostic tools. Deep learning-based computer-aided detection (CAD) systems can assist radiologists by automating lesion detection and classification. This study investigates the performance of various You Only Look Once (YOLO) models and a Hybrid Convolutional-Transformer Architecture (YOLOv5, YOLOv8, YOLOv10, YOLOv11, and Real-Time-DEtection Transformer (RT-DETR)) for detecting mammographic lesions on an affordable embedded system.
methodsWe developed a custom web-based annotation tool to enhance mammogram labeling accuracy, using a dataset of 3169 patients from Thailand and expert annotations from three radiologists. Lesions were classified into six categories: Masses Benign (MB), Calcifications Benign (CB), Associated Features Benign (AFB), Masses Malignant (MM), Calcifications Malignant (CM), and Associated Features Malignant (AFM).
resultsOur results show that the YOLOv11n model is the optimal choice for the NVIDIA Jetson Nano, achieving an accuracy of 0.86 and an inference speed of 6.16 ± 0.31 frames per second. A comparative analysis with a graphics processing unit (GPU)-powered system revealed that the Jetson Nano achieves comparable detection performance at a fraction of the cost.
conclusionsThe current research landscape has not yet integrated advanced YOLO versions for embedded deployment in mammography. This method could facilitate screening in clinics without high-end workstations, demonstrating the feasibility of deploying CAD systems in low-resource environments and underscoring its potential for real-world clinical applications.
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.