ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Transfer learning with Bayesian optimization for colorectal cancer histopathology classification.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2026. 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.
- Artificial intelligence in small tissue biopsies: diagnostic applications, histochemical integration, and methodological challenges in surgical pathology.Histochemistry and cell biology · 2026Review
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
backgroundAutomated colorectal cancer (CRC) histopathology classification remains challenging due to variations in datasets, staining conditions, and tissue morphology across institutions. Many prior studies apply standard CNN architectures with fixed hyperparameters, leaving limited examination of how model choice and optimization strategies affect performance robustness across heterogeneous CRC data.
methodsWe evaluate eight transfer learning models on three-class CRC datasets and propose CRC-BayTune, applying Bayesian optimization to tune key training parameters, including learning rate, batch size, with fine-tuning depth. All models are assessed in patch-level experimental settings, and statistical significance is quantified using Friedman tests, repeated-measures ANOVA, and post hoc analyses. Robustness is assessed by introducing controlled Gaussian noise perturbations. Grad-CAM provides qualitative visual explanations by highlighting regions that contribute to model predictions.
resultsDenseNet201, InceptionV3, InceptionResNetV2, and ResNet50V2 achieved the highest median MCC values of 0.984, 0.982, 0.975, and 0.983, respectively. Statistical analysis confirms that both model architecture ([Formula: see text], Friedman) and hyperparameter configuration ([Formula: see text], RM-ANOVA) significantly affect performance. Models with deeper feature hierarchies demonstrated more stable convergence and smaller accuracy degradation under noise.
conclusionThe results show that systematic hyperparameter tuning can improve the training stability and classification performance of standard CNN models compared with fixed configurations in CRC histopathology tasks. The findings underscore that model performance in this setting is sensitive to choices such as learning rate, batch size, and fine-tuning depth, and that evaluating these factors explicitly can support more reliable use of deep learning models in computational pathology.
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.