ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Convolutional Networks and Transformers for Mammography Classification: An Experimental Study.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Classification of dysphagia severity after lateral medullary infarction with deep learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based classification of benign and malignant breast microcalcifications in mammography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advanced Brain Tumor Classification in MR Images Using Transfer Learning and Pre-Trained Deep CNN Models.Cancers · 2025Article
- Detection of breast cancer in digital breast tomosynthesis with vision transformers.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Deep Learning in Breast Cancer Imaging: State of the Art and Recent Advancements in Early 2024.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Mammography Datasets for Neural Networks-Survey.Journal of imaging · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) have received a large share of research in mammography image analysis due to their capability of extracting hierarchical features directly from raw data. Recently, Vision Transformers are emerging as viable alternative to CNNs in medical imaging, in some cases performing on par or better than their convolutional counterparts. In this work, we conduct an extensive experimental study to compare the most recent CNN and Vision Transformer architectures for whole mammograms classification. We selected, trained and tested 33 different models, 19 convolutional- and 14 transformer-based, on the largest publicly available mammography image database OMI-DB. We also performed an analysis of the performance at eight different image resolutions and considering all the individual lesion categories in isolation (masses, calcifications, focal asymmetries, architectural distortions). Our findings confirm the potential of visual transformers, which performed on par with traditional CNNs like ResNet, but at the same time show a superiority of modern convolutional networks like EfficientNet.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.