Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 426

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 113 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of artificial intelligence techniques in disease diagnosis and prediction

Open access
Ghaffar Nia, Nafiseh, Kaplanoglu, Erkan, Nasab, Ahad·2023·Discover Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

A broad range of medical diagnoses is based on analyzing disease images obtained through high-tech digital devices. The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the assessment of medical images has led to accurate evaluations being performed automatically, which in turn has reduced the workload of physicians, decreased errors and times in diagnosis, and improved performance in the prediction and detection of various diseases. AI techniques based on medical image processing are an essential area of research that uses advanced computer algorithms for prediction, diagnosis, and treatment planning, leading to a remarkable impact on decision-making procedures. Machine Learning (ML) and Deep Learning (DL) as advanced AI techniques are two main subfields applied in the healthcare system to diagnose diseases, discover medication, and identify patient risk factors. The advancement of electronic medical records and big data technologies in recent years has accompanied the success of ML and DL algorithms. ML includes neural networks and fuzzy logic algorithms with various applications in automating forecasting and diagnosis processes. DL algorithm is an ML technique that does not rely on expert feature extraction, unlike classical neural network algorithms. DL algorithms with high-performance calculations give promising results in medical image analysis, such as fusion, segmentation, recording, and classification. Support Vector Machine (SVM) as an ML method and Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) as a DL method is usually the most widely used techniques for analyzing and diagnosing diseases. This review study aims to cover recent AI techniques in diagnosing and predicting numerous diseases such as cancers, heart, lung, skin, genetic, and neural disorders, which perform more precisely compared to specialists without human error. Also, AI's existing challenges and limitations in the medical area are discussed and highlighted.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s44163-023-00049-5

Cites

113 of 113 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 113 references

Cited by

See all 426

Metadata

Authors
Ghaffar Nia, N., Kaplanoglu, E., & Nasab, A.
Venue
Discover Artificial Intelligence
Published
2023-01-30
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
5-5
ISSN
2731-0809 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4318483790
Cited by
426
References
113
FWCI
14.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of artificial intelligence techniques in disease diagnosis and prediction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s44163-023-00049-5
The paper
Ghaffar Nia, N., Kaplanoglu, E., & Nasab, A. (2023). Evaluation of artificial intelligence techniques in disease diagnosis and prediction. Discover Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-023-00049-5

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.