Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 213

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

SD-CNN: A shallow-deep CNN for improved breast cancer diagnosis

Open access
Gao, Fei, Wu, Teresa, Li, Jing, Zheng, Bin, Ruan, Lingxiang, Shang, Desheng, Patel, Bhavika·2018·Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics

Abstract

Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Nevertheless, it is also one of the most treatable malignances if detected early. Screening for breast cancer with full field digital mammography (FFDM) has been widely used. However, it demonstrates limited performance for women with dense breasts. An emerging technology in the field is contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM), which includes a low energy (LE) image similar to FFDM, and a recombined image leveraging tumor neoangiogenesis similar to breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). CEDM has shown better diagnostic accuracy than FFDM. While promising, CEDM is not yet widely available across medical centers. In this research, we propose a Shallow-Deep Convolutional Neural Network (SD-CNN) where a shallow CNN is developed to derive "virtual" recombined images from LE images, and a deep CNN is employed to extract novel features from LE, recombined or "virtual" recombined images for ensemble models to classify the cases as benign vs. cancer. To evaluate the validity of our approach, we first develop a deep-CNN using 49 CEDM cases collected from Mayo Clinic to prove the contributions from recombined images for improved breast cancer diagnosis (0.85 in accuracy, 0.84 in AUC using LE imaging vs. 0.89 in accuracy, 0.91 in AUC using both LE and recombined imaging). We then develop a shallow-CNN using the same 49 CEDM cases to learn the nonlinear mapping from LE to recombined images. Next, we use 89 FFDM cases from INbreast, a public database to generate "virtual" recombined images. Using FFDM alone provides 0.84 in accuracy (AUC = 0.87), whereas SD-CNN improves the diagnostic accuracy to 0.90 (AUC = 0.92).

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 · 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2018.09.004

Cites

7 of 7 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 7 references

Cited by

See all 213

Metadata

Authors
Gao, F., Wu, T., Li, J., Zheng, B., Ruan, L., Shang, D., & Patel, B.
Venue
Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-12
Volume
70
Pages
53-62
ISSN
  • 0730-4862 (ISSN-L)
  • 0895-6111
OpenAlex
W2791942584
Cited by
213
References
7
FWCI
11.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: SD-CNN: A shallow-deep CNN for improved breast cancer diagnosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.compmedimag.2018.09.004
The paper
Gao, F., Wu, T., Li, J., Zheng, B., Ruan, L., Shang, D., & Patel, B. (2018). SD-CNN: A shallow-deep CNN for improved breast cancer diagnosis. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compmedimag.2018.09.004

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.