Cited by 189Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementAI in cancer detectionAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Malignant Melanoma Classification Using Deep Learning: Datasets, Performance Measurements, Challenges and Opportunities

Open access
Naeem, Ahmad, Farooq, Muhammad Shoaib, Khelifi, Adel, Abid, Adnan·2020·IEEE Access

Abstract

Melanoma remains the most harmful form of skin cancer. Convolutional neural network (CNN) based classifiers have become the best choice for melanoma detection in the recent era. The research has indicated that classifiers based on CNN classify skin cancer images equivalent to dermatologists, which has allowed a quick and life-saving diagnosis. This study provides a systematic literature review of the latest research on melanoma classification using CNN. We restrict our study to the binary classification of melanoma. In particular, this research discusses the CNN classifiers and compares the accuracies of these classifiers when tested on non-published datasets. We conducted a systematic review of existing literature, identifying the literature through a systematic search of the IEEE, Medline, ACM, Springer, Elsevier, and Wiley databases. A total of 5112 studies were identified out of which 55 well-reputed studies were selected. The main objective of this study is to collect state of the art research which identify the recent research trends, challenges and opportunities for melanoma diagnosis and investigate the existing solutions for the diagnosis of melanoma detection using deep learning. Moreover, proposed taxonomy for melanoma detection has been presented that summarizes the broad variety of existing melanoma detection solutions. Lastly, proposed model, challenges and opportunities have been presented which helps the researchers in the domain of melanoma detection.

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 · 10.1109/access.2020.3001507

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. T. Mendonca, P. M. Ferreira, J. S. Marques, A. R. S. Marcal, and J. Rozeira, ''PH2-A dermoscopic image database for research and benchmarking,'' in Proc. 35th Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. (EMBC), Jul. 2013, pp. 5437-5440.
  2. J. Imag. Syst. Technol., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 348-357, Jun. 2020.
  3. Springer Link | Advance Search. Accessed: May 4, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://link.springer.com/advanced-search
  4. Wiley Online Library | Advance Search. Accessed: May 4, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/search/advanced

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Naeem, A., Farooq, M. S., Khelifi, A., & Abid, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Management and Technology (PK)
  • Abu Dhabi University (AE)
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2020
Volume
8
Pages
110575-110597
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3035741257
Cited by
189
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 2
FWCI
9.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
melanoma, melanoma classification, skin cancer detection, convolutional neural networks, binary classification, dermatological image analysis, classifier accuracy comparison

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