ArticleScientific reports2026
An adaptive multiscale local mesh ternary pattern technique with extensive pre-processing and Grey Wolf optimisation based classifiers for oral cancer image classification.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
This study introduces an enhanced texture-based algorithm for the classification of oral cancer images. The images are first extensively preprocessed to enhance the affected area with techniques like gamma correction, adaptive histogram equalization, and sharpening of images using a Laplacian filter. Then a feature descriptor is extracted using an Adaptive Multiscale Local Mesh ternary patterns, which uses an adaptive threshold, and a sliding window of multiple scales. A machine learning model is then used for classification, which is also optimised using Grey Wolf optimisation. The pedagogy yields an overall average accuracy of 98.29% and 99.89% on two publicly available datasets. Also, the model is compared to three state-of-the-art techniques for oral cancer detection and is found to give an average improvement of 9.21% and 20.67% on the respective datasets.
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.