Cited by 58AI in cancer detectionRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment

Automatic ovarian tumors recognition system based on ensemble convolutional neural network with ultrasound imaging

Open access
Hsu, Shih-Tien, Su, Yu-Jie, Hung, Chian-Huei, Chen, Ming-Jer, Lu, Chien-Hsing, Kuo, Chih-En·2022·BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Abstract

Background: Upon the discovery of ovarian cysts, obstetricians, gynecologists, and ultrasound examiners must address the common clinical challenge of distinguishing between benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Numerous types of ovarian tumors exist, many of which exhibit similar characteristics that increase the ambiguity in clinical diagnosis. Using deep learning technology, we aimed to develop a method that rapidly and accurately assists the different diagnosis of ovarian tumors in ultrasound images. Methods: Based on deep learning method, we used ten well-known convolutional neural network models (e.g., Alexnet, GoogleNet, and ResNet) for training of transfer learning. To ensure method stability and robustness, we repeated the random sampling of the training and validation data ten times. The mean of the ten test results was set as the final assessment data. After the training process was completed, the three models with the highest ratio of calculation accuracy to time required for classification were used for ensemble learning pertaining. Finally, the interpretation results of the ensemble classifier were used as the final results. We also applied ensemble gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) technology to visualize the decision-making results of the models. Results: The highest mean accuracy, mean sensitivity, and mean specificity of ten single CNN models were 90.51 ± 4.36%, 89.77 ± 4.16%, and 92.00 ± 5.95%, respectively. The mean accuracy, mean sensitivity, and mean specificity of the ensemble classifier method were 92.15 ± 2.84%, 91.37 ± 3.60%, and 92.92 ± 4.00%, respectively. The performance of the ensemble classifier is better than that of a single classifier in three evaluation metrics. Moreover, the standard deviation is also better which means the ensemble classifier is more stable and robust. Conclusion: From the comprehensive perspective of data quantity, data diversity, robustness of validation strategy, and overall accuracy, the proposed method outperformed the methods used in previous studies. In future studies, we will continue to increase the number of authenticated images and apply our proposed method in clinical settings to increase its robustness and reliability.

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 · 10.1186/s12911-022-02047-6

Cites

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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 37 · Cited by 58

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [8]Shoeibi A, Khodatars M, Alizadehsani R, Ghassemi N, Jafari M, Moridian P, Khadem A, Sadeghi D, Hussain S, Zare A. Automated detection and forecasting of covid-19 using deep learning techniques: a review. arXiv preprint arXiv:200710785 2020.
  2. [34]Howard AG, Zhu M, Chen B, Kalenichenko D, Wang W, Weyand T, Andreetto M, Adam H. Mobilenets: efficient convolutional neural networks for mobile vision applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:170404861 2017.
  3. [35]Freund Y, Schapire RE. Experiments with a new boosting algorithm. In: icml: 1996. Citeseer; 1996. pp. 148–156.

Authors
Hsu, S.-T., Su, Y.-J., Hung, C.-H., Chen, M.-J., Lu, C.-H., & Kuo, C.-E.
Affiliations
  • Taichung Veterans General Hospital (TW)
  • National Chung Hsing University (TW)
Corresponding author
Kuo, Chih-En
Venue
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published
2022-11-17
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
298-298
ISSN
1472-6947 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4309517808
Cited by
58
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 9
FWCI
3.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Science Council
  • Taichung Veterans General Hospital (TCVGH-AI-11002, TCVGH-AI-10903)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Keywords
ovarian neoplasms, ovarian cysts, benign versus malignant differentiation, ultrasonography, ensemble convolutional neural networks, transfer learning, Grad-CAM, decision visualization, computer-aided diagnosis, deep learning
MeSH terms
Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Ovarian Neoplasms, Ultrasonography, Reproducibility of Results, Neural Networks, Computer

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