The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A deep neural network improves endoscopic detection of early gastric cancer without blind spots
Abstract
Background Gastric cancer is the third most lethal malignancy worldwide. A novel deep convolution neural network (DCNN) to perform visual tasks has been recently developed. The aim of this study was to build a system using the DCNN to detect early gastric cancer (EGC) without blind spots during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Methods 3170 gastric cancer and 5981 benign images were collected to train the DCNN to detect EGC. A total of 24549 images from different parts of stomach were collected to train the DCNN to monitor blind spots. Class activation maps were developed to automatically cover suspicious cancerous regions. A grid model for the stomach was used to indicate the existence of blind spots in unprocessed EGD videos. Results The DCNN identified EGC from non-malignancy with an accuracy of 92.5 %, a sensitivity of 94.0 %, a specificity of 91.0 %, a positive predictive value of 91.3 %, and a negative predictive value of 93.8 %, outperforming all levels of endoscopists. In the task of classifying gastric locations into 10 or 26 parts, the DCNN achieved an accuracy of 90 % or 65.9 %, on a par with the performance of experts. In real-time unprocessed EGD videos, the DCNN achieved automated performance for detecting EGC and monitoring blind spots. Conclusions We developed a system based on a DCNN to accurately detect EGC and recognize gastric locations better than endoscopists, and proactively track suspicious cancerous lesions and monitor blind spots during EGD.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
Pan, S. J., & Yang, Q. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2009.191 · Cited by 23,387
Li, S., Liu, G., Tang, X., Lu, J., & Hu, J. (2017) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s17081729 · Cited by 211
Cited by
Liu, X., Faes, L., Kale, A. U., Wagner, S. K., Fu, D. J., Bruynseels, A., Mahendiran, T., Moraes, G., Shamdas, M., Kern, C., et al. (2019) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30123-2 · Cited by 1,883
Malik, H., Farooq, M. S., Khelifi, A., Abid, A., Nasir Qureshi, J., & Hussain, M. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3004766 · Cited by 104
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, L., Zhou, W., Wan, X., Zhang, J., Shen, L., Hu, S., Ding, Q., Mu, G., Yin, A., Huang, X., Liu, J., Jiang, X., Wang, Z., Deng, Y., Liu, M., Lin, R., Ling, T., Li, P., Wu, Q., Jin, P., Chen, J., & Yu, H.
- Venue
- Endoscopy
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 2019-03-12
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 06
- Pages
- 522-531
- ISSN
- 0013-726X (ISSN-L)
- 1438-8812
- OpenAlex
- W2921535297
- Cited by
- 254
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 15.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: A deep neural network improves endoscopic detection of early gastric cancer without blind spots. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1055/a-0855-3532
- The paper
- Wu, L., Zhou, W., Wan, X., Zhang, J., Shen, L., Hu, S., Ding, Q., Mu, G., Yin, A., Huang, X., Liu, J., Jiang, X., Wang, Z., Deng, Y., Liu, M., Lin, R., Ling, T., Li, P., Wu, Q., . . . Yu, H. (2019). A deep neural network improves endoscopic detection of early gastric cancer without blind spots. Endoscopy. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0855-3532
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.