ArticleCancer medicine2026
EfficientNet-B0-Based Screening of WBC-Diff Scattergram Images for Hematological Abnormalities.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
White blood cell differential (WBC-Diff) scattergrams are used to screen for hematological abnormalities in potential hematopoietic malignancies and abnormal conditions. However, these potential indications can be easily missed. We applied deep learning models to develop a new and rapid workflow by learning the characteristics of WBC-Diff scattergram images for early hematological abnormality screening. A total of 4297 WBC-Diff scattergram images, including healthy controls, were included and divided into 19 categories. Eleven models encompassing both CNNs (ResNet18, ResNet50, VGG16, InceptionV3, DenseNet121, MobileNetV2, EfficientNet-B0, and EfficientNet-B1) and Vision Transformers (Swin-Tiny, DeiT-Base, and ConvNeXt-Tiny) were trained and compared. Grad-CAM interpretability analysis, hierarchical clustering, and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were used to characterize the learned feature space. Among all models, Swin-Tiny achieved the highest accuracy (70.44%), while EfficientNet-B0 was selected as the primary model due to its favorable balance of classification performance (67.90% accuracy) and computational efficiency (4.0 M parameters, 0.42 G floating-point operations (GFLOPs), 2.8 × faster CPU inference than Swin-Tiny). The 5-run stability evaluation confirmed reproducible performance, and evaluation on an independent hold-out dataset confirmed patient-independent generalizability. As an upstream triage endpoint (normal vs. abnormal), the model achieved a sensitivity of 0.975 (test) and 0.984 (independent hold-out set) with a false-negative rate of 2.5% and 1.6%, respectively. At the screening level, only 2.2% of abnormal images were mis-routed to "normal," reflecting a sensitivity-first, specificity-as-safeguard design. Grad-CAM analysis revealed disease-specific activation patterns that mapped to established cell population zones on the WBC-Diff scattergram (e.g., myeloblast zone for M1 and neutrophil-basophil cluster for CML), providing support for the biological plausibility of model decisions, with significant differences among disease categories in the visual feature space (MANOVA, p < 0.01). This study demonstrated that a new automated hematology workflow incorporating EfficientNet-B0 could provide early and rapid screening of potential hematological abnormalities, particularly suitable for deployment in resource-constrained clinical settings.
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.