ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN1-3) Disease Grading Using a Mixture of Experts Approach.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate grading of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN1-3) from colposcopic images is clinically critical yet challenging due to subtle inter-grade morphology and substantial imaging variability. We propose an attention-guided mixture-of-experts (MoE) framework that ensembles five pretrained DenseNet-121 experts and employs an attention mechanism over pooled intermediate features to drive a gating network that adaptively weights expert outputs for each image. Operating on feature representations rather than raw pixels allows the gating network to perform input-specific expert selection and improves robustness to ambiguous cases. Using the Intel & MobileODT cervical screening dataset with a strict patient-wise 70/10/20 split, we report mean performance over five runs with 95% confidence intervals. On the independent test set, the proposed MoE achieves 74.0% ± 1.6 accuracy and 72.1% ± 1.8 F1, with per-class AUCs of 0.88 (CIN1), 0.82 (CIN2), and 0.85 (CIN3). The method yields statistically significant improvements over single-network DenseNet-121 baselines and alternative MoE backbones (MobileNet, EfficientNet, ShuffleNet) (p < 0.01). Ablation studies show that attention-guided gating contributes approximately 5-8% absolute accuracy gain over uniform weighting, and that five experts provide the optimal accuracy-efficiency balance. We further present attention visualizations and limited external validation to assess interpretability and generalizability. Although performance remains below that of recent transformer-ensemble models evaluated on smaller or less diverse test sets, the modular and interpretable MoE architecture offers a practical foundation for integrating segmentation or transformer-based experts to advance clinical utility. Code and trained models will be released to support reproducibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41749034What 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.