ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Deep learning-based automated detection of endometrioid endometrial carcinoma in histopathology.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have enabled automated tumor identification. To overcome challenges in traditional pathology, including complex sampling and limited physician resources, accessible tools for automated diagnosis are urgently needed. Methods: We developed a deep learning system based on an improved ResNet-18 to automatically identify endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC) from H&E-stained endometrial hyperplastic lesions and normal tissues. Results: The model demonstrated strong performance in detecting endometrioid endometrial carcinoma. The positive predictive value (PPV), defined as the proportion of true disease cases among all positive diagnostic results, reached 95.13%, and the F1-score, defined as the harmonic mean of precision and recall, reached 0.95. The model achieved a PPV of 87.15% and an F1-score of 0.87 for typical hyperplasia, as well as a PPV of 79.88% and an F1-score of 0.74 for atypical hyperplasia, both meeting clinically acceptable thresholds. For normal endometrial physiological states, the PPVs were 91.75% (proliferative phase), 80.94% (secretory phase), and 80.88% (menopausal phase). Conclusion: This multi-task deep learning system provides stable and efficient support for automated EEC identification and effectively classifies endometrial pathological and physiological states, demonstrating strong potential for clinical translation.
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.