ArticleGland surgery2026
Channel attention of the image for distinguishing ductal carcinoma
Article in Gland surgery, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is widely recognized as a precursor to invasive breast cancer, with an estimated 20-50% of cases progressing to invasive disease. The early detection of DCIS could save doctors and patients more time to deal with the breast cancer, which has posed a great threat to the life safety of women worldwide. This study aimed to develop a deep learning algorithm based on the image-level attention to distinguish DCIS from the benign mimics on ultrasound images, assisting doctors in screening for benign breast lesions. Methods: By screening the biopsy results of 3,327 patients, the ultrasound images of 612 patients were retrospectively collected, including DCIS and benign mimics. The dataset was randomly split at the patient level into training (70%, n=430) and test (30%, n=182) sets. Using ResNet18 as the backbone architecture, we compared and developed models with image-level attention mechanisms. Model performance was evaluated on the test set using the area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F1-score. To assess the statistical significance of performance differences between models, the Holm-Bonferroni correction was employed to account for multiple comparisons. Results: Through quantitative comparison with 6 shallow benchmark algorithms such as AlexNet, VGG16, GoogleNet, ResNet18, CoAtNet and Swin Transformer, the effectiveness of our method was demonstrated, which achieved the best performance with AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision and F1-score of 0.868±0.009, 0.835±0.016, 0.767±0.056, 0.916±0.057, 0.916±0.059, 0.835±0.04, respectively. After Holm-Bonferroni correction, these improvements were statistically significant (corrected P<0.05) compared to all other models. The effect size of AUC, specificity, precision, F1-score were 0.69, 0.68, 0.89, 0.58, respectively, revealing large practical improvement. Furthermore, Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (GradCAM) visualization confirmed that our model focused more accurately on lesion regions, providing interpretability for its superior feature extraction. Conclusions: In this paper, we proposed the ResNet18-CA for the classification of DCIS and confused cases, which was good at learning the ultrasound image features. The proposed network achieved higher accuracy than the other methods being compared.
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.