Evaluation of machine learning methods with Fourier Transform features for classifying ovarian tumors based on ultrasound images
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION: Ovarian tumors are the most common diagnostic challenge for gynecologists and ultrasound examination has become the main technique for assessment of ovarian pathology and for preoperative distinction between malignant and benign ovarian tumors. However, ultrasonography is highly examiner-dependent and there may be an important variability between two different specialists when examining the same case. The objective of this work is the evaluation of different well-known Machine Learning (ML) systems to perform the automatic categorization of ovarian tumors from ultrasound images. METHODS: We have used a real patient database whose input features have been extracted from 348 images, from the IOTA tumor images database, holding together with the class labels of the images. For each patient case and ultrasound image, its input features have been previously extracted using Fourier descriptors computed on the Region Of Interest (ROI). Then, four ML techniques are considered for performing the classification stage: K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Linear Discriminant (LD), Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Extreme Learning Machine (ELM). RESULTS: According to our obtained results, the KNN classifier provides inaccurate predictions (less than 60% of accuracy) independently of the size of the local approximation, whereas the classifiers based on LD, SVM and ELM are robust in this biomedical classification (more than 85% of accuracy). CONCLUSIONS: ML methods can be efficiently used for developing the classification stage in computer-aided diagnosis systems of ovarian tumor from ultrasound images. These approaches are able to provide automatic classification with a high rate of accuracy. Future work should aim at enhancing the classifier design using ensemble techniques. Another ongoing work is to exploit different kind of features extracted from ultrasound images.
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
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.
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?
Three studies assessed the performance of automated tumor classification.
“Three studies assessed the performance of automated tumor classification [184,191,192]”
Studies with smaller sample sizes showed a level of performance reaching those of human experts.
“there were also studies with smaller sample sizes that showed a level of performance reaching those of human experts [188,191,192].”
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 41 · Cited by 70
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- [17]Gonzales RC, Woods RE. Digital Image Processing, Addison & Wesley Publishing Company 1992.
- [19]Bishop CM. Bishop Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer, New York 2010.
- [33]Mateo F, Lendasse A. A variable selection approach based on the delta test for extreme learning machine models. Proceedings of the European symposium on time series prediction, 2008, 57–66.
- Authors
- Martínez-Más, J., Bueno-Crespo, A., Khazendar, S., Remezal-Solano, M., Martínez-Cendán, J.-P., Jassim, S., Du, H., Al Assam, H., Bourne, T., & Timmerman, D.
- Affiliations
- Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca (ES)
- Universidad Católica de Murcia (ES)
- University of Sulaimani (IQ)
- Santa Lucía University General Hospital (ES)
- University of Buckingham (GB)
- Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital (GB)
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Martínez-Más, José
- Bueno-Crespo, Andrés
- Khazendar, Shan
- Martínez-Cendán, Juan-Pedro
- Jassim, Sabah
- Du, Hongbo
- Bourne, Tom
- Timmerman, Dirk
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2019-07-26
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- e0219388
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6660116
- OpenAlex
- W2965465841
- Cited by
- 70
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 3.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Buckingham E-Archive of Research (University of Buckingham) (acceptedVersion)
- Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad, Gobierno de España (TIN2016-78799-P)
- 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 › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- ovarian neoplasms, ovarian cancer, ultrasound image classification, Fourier descriptors, computer-aided diagnosis, benign versus malignant tumors, support vector machine, extreme learning machine, linear discriminant analysis, k-nearest neighbors, region of interest features
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Algorithms, Female, Fourier Analysis, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Ovarian Neoplasms, ROC Curve, Ultrasonography, Area Under Curve
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