Show source-provided references
1. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries
10.3322/caac.21660 ↗4. Incidence, mortality, survival, and disease burden of breast cancer in China compared to other developed countries
10.1111/ajco.13958 ↗5. A technical review of convolutional neural network-based mammographic breast cancer diagnosis
10.1155/2019/6509357 ↗6. Estimating breast cancer overdiagnosis after screening mammography among older women in the United States
10.7326/M23-0133 ↗8. Breast tomographic ultrasound: The spectrum from current dense breast cancer screenings to future theranostic treatments
10.3390/tomography10040044 ↗9. Yu, S., Wu, S., Zhuang, L., Wei, X., Sak, M., Neb, D., Hu, J., and Xie, Y. (2017). Efficient segmentation of a breast in B-mode ultrasound tomography using three-dimensional GrabCut (GC3D). Sensors, 17.
10.3390/s17081827 ↗11. Boca, I., Ciurea, A.I., Ciortea, C.A., and Dudea, S.M. (2021). Pros and cons for automated breast ultrasound (ABUS): A narrative review. J. Pers. Med., 11.
10.3390/jpm11080703 ↗12. The performance of 3D ABUS versus HHUS in the visualisation and BI-RADS characterisation of breast lesions in a large cohort of 1,886 women
10.1007/s00330-017-5011-9 ↗13. Diagnostic performance of 3D automated breast ultrasound (3D-ABUS) in a clinical screening setting—A retrospective study
10.1007/s00330-023-10568-5 ↗15. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence for breast cancer: Image augmentation, segmentation, diagnosis, and prognosis approaches
10.1016/j.semcancer.2023.09.001 ↗16. Transition of traditional method to deep learning based computer-aided system for breast cancer using automated breast ultrasound system (ABUS) images: A review
10.1007/s10462-023-10511-6 ↗21. Performance of novel deep learning network with the incorporation of the automatic segmentation network for diagnosis of breast cancer in automated breast ultrasound
10.1007/s00330-022-08836-x ↗23. 3D breast ultrasound image classification using 2.5 D deep learning
26. Yu, S., Chen, M., Zhang, E., Wu, J., Yu, H., Yang, Z., Ma, L., Gu, X., and Lu, W. (2020). Robustness study of noisy annotation in deep learning based medical image segmentation. Phys. Med. Biol., 65.
10.1088/1361-6560/ab99e5 ↗27. Bianchessi, T., Tampu, I.E., Blystad, I., Lundberg, P., Nyman, P., Eklund, A., and Haj-Hosseini, N. (2023). Pediatric brain tumor type classification using deep learning on MR images from the children’s brain tumor network. medRxiv.
10.1101/2023.05.12.23289829 ↗28. Yue, Y., and Li, Z. (2016, January 27–30). Deep residual learning for image recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
29. Manzari, O.N., Ahmadabadi, H., Kashiani, H., Shokouhi, S.B., and Ayatollahi, A. (2023). MedViT: A robust vision transformer for generalized medical image classification. Comput. Biol. Med., 157.
10.1016/j.compbiomed.2023.106791 ↗30. Huo, X., Sun, G., Tian, S., Wang, Y., Yu, L., Long, J., Zhang, W., and Li, A. (2024). HiFuse: Hierarchical multi-scale feature fusion network for medical image classification. Biomed. Signal Process. Control, 87.
10.1016/j.bspc.2023.105534 ↗31. Yue, Y., and Li, Z. (2023). Medmamba: Vision mamba for medical image classification. arXiv.
32. Jang, J., and Hwang, D. (2022, January 19–20). M3T: Three-dimensional Medical image classifier using Multi-plane and Multi-slice Transformer. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, New Orleans, LA, USA.
10.1109/CVPR52688.2022.02006 ↗33. Wang, X., Yi, J., and Li, Y. (2022, January 14–16). Application of fusion model of 3D-ResNeXt and Bi-LSTM network in Alzheimer’s disease classification. Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Conference on Communication and Information Systems, Chongqing, China.
10.1109/ICCIS56375.2022.9998141 ↗35. Tran, D., Wang, H., Torresani, L., Ray, J., LeCun, Y., and Paluri, M. (2018, January 18–22). A closer look at spatiotemporal convolutions for action recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
10.1109/CVPR.2018.00675 ↗36. Shafiq, M., and Gu, Z. (2022). Deep residual learning for image recognition: A survey. Appl. Sci., 12.
10.3390/app12188972 ↗37. Dosovitskiy, A., Beyer, L., Kolesnikov, A., Weissenborn, D., Zhai, X., Unterthiner, T., Dehghani, M., Minderer, M., Heigold, G., and Gelly, S. (May, January 26). An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations, Virtual.
38. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, L., and Polosukhin, I. (2017, January 4–9). Attention is all you need. Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Long Beach, CA, USA.
39. Xie, S., Girshick, R., Dollár, P., Tu, Z., and He, K. (2017, January 21–26). Aggregated residual transformations for deep neural networks. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA.
10.1109/CVPR.2017.634 ↗40. Zhang, S., Zheng, D., Hu, X., and Yang, M. (November, January 30). Bidirectional long short-term memory networks for relation classification. Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, Shanghai, China.
41. Visualizing data using t-SNE
43. Mahajan, P., Uddin, S., Hajati, F., and Moni, M.A. (2023). Ensemble learning for disease prediction: A review. Healthcare, 11.
10.3390/healthcare11121808 ↗44. Xiao, T., Liu, L., Li, K., Qin, W., Yu, S., and Li, Z. (2018). Comparison of transferred deep neural networks in ultrasonic breast masses discrimination. BioMed Res. Int., 1.
10.1155/2018/4605191 ↗47. Dual domain distribution disruption with semantics preservation: Unsupervised domain adaptation for medical image segmentation
10.1016/j.media.2024.103275 ↗