Search

Breast cancer (BC) is the leading cause of death among women worldwide. It affects in general women older than 40 years old. Medical images analysis is one of the most promising research areas since it provides facilities for diagnosis and decision-making of several diseases such as BC. This paper conducts a Structured Literature Review (SLR) of the use of Machine Learning (ML) and Image Processing (IP) techniques to deal with BC imaging. A set of 530 papers published between 2000 and August 2019 were selected and analyzed according to ten criteria: year and publication channel, empirical type, research type, medical task, machine learning techniques, datasets used, validation methods, performance measures and image processing techniques which include image pre-processing, segmentation, feature extraction and feature selection. Results showed that diagnosis was the most used medical task and that Deep Learning techniques (DL) were largely used to perform classification. Furthermore, we found out that classification was the most ML objective investigated followed by prediction and clustering. Most of the selected studies used Mammograms as imaging modalities rather than Ultrasound or Magnetic Resonance Imaging with the use of public or private datasets with MIAS as the most frequently investigated public dataset. As for image processing techniques, the majority of the selected studies pre-process their input images by reducing the noise and normalizing the colors, and some of them use segmentation to extract the region of interest with the thresholding method. For feature extraction, we note that researchers extracted the relevant features using classical feature extraction techniques (e.g. Texture features, Shape features, etc.) or DL techniques (e. g. VGG16, VGG19, ResNet, etc.), and finally few papers used feature selection techniques in particular the filter methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Machine learning and deep learning are two subsets of artificial intelligence that involve teaching computers to learn and make decisions from any sort of data. Most recent developments in artificial intelligence are coming from deep learning, which has proven revolutionary in almost all fields, from computer vision to health sciences. The effects of deep learning in medicine have changed the conventional ways of clinical application significantly. Although some sub-fields of medicine, such as pediatrics, have been relatively slow in receiving the critical benefits of deep learning, related research in pediatrics has started to accumulate to a significant level, too. Hence, in this paper, we review recently developed machine learning and deep learning-based solutions for neonatology applications. We systematically evaluate the roles of both classical machine learning and deep learning in neonatology applications, define the methodologies, including algorithmic developments, and describe the remaining challenges in the assessment of neonatal diseases by using PRISMA 2020 guidelines. To date, the primary areas of focus in neonatology regarding AI applications have included survival analysis, neuroimaging, analysis of vital parameters and biosignals, and retinopathy of prematurity diagnosis. We have categorically summarized 106 research articles from 1996 to 2022 and discussed their pros and cons, respectively. In this systematic review, we aimed to further enhance the comprehensiveness of the study. We also discuss possible directions for new AI models and the future of neonatology with the rising power of AI, suggesting roadmaps for the integration of AI into neonatal intensive care units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans degrade image quality and thus negatively affect the outcome measures of clinical and research scanning. Considering the time-consuming and subjective nature of visual quality control (QC), multiple (semi-)automatic QC algorithms have been developed. This systematic review presents an overview of the available (semi-)automatic QC algorithms and software packages designed for raw, structural T1-weighted (T1w) MRI datasets. The objective of this review was to identify the differences among these algorithms in terms of their features of interest, performance, and benchmarks. Methods: We queried PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), and Web of Science databases on the fifth of January 2023, and cross-checked reference lists of retrieved papers. Bias assessment was performed using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool). Results: A total of 18 distinct algorithms were identified, demonstrating significant variations in methods, features, datasets, and benchmarks. The algorithms were categorized into rule-based, classical machine learning-based, and deep learning-based approaches. Numerous unique features were defined, which can be roughly divided into features capturing entropy, contrast, and normative measures. Conclusion: Due to dataset-specific optimization, it is challenging to draw broad conclusions about comparative performance. Additionally, large variations exist in the used datasets and benchmarks, further hindering direct algorithm comparison. The findings emphasize the need for standardization and comparative studies for advancing QC in MR imaging. Efforts should focus on identifying a dataset-independent measure as well as algorithm-independent methods for assessing the relative performance of different approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]