ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring the role of preprocessing combinations in hyperspectral imaging for deep learning colorectal cancer detection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compares various preprocessing techniques for hyperspectral deep learning-based cancer diagnostics. The study considers different spectrum scaling and noise reduction options across spatial and spectral axes of hyperspectral datacubes, as well varying levels of blood and light reflections removal. We also examine how the size of the patches extracted from the hyperspectral data affects the models' performance. We additionally explore various strategies to mitigate our dataset's imbalance (where cancerous tissues are underrepresented). Our results indicate that. Scaling: Standardization significantly improves both sensitivity and specificity compared to Normalization. Larger input patch sizes enhance performance by capturing more spatial context. Noise reduction unexpectedly degrades performance. Blood filtering is more effective than filtering reflected light pixels, although neither approach produces significant results. By carefully maintaining consistent testing conditions, we ensure a fair comparison across preprocessing methods and reproducibility. Our findings highlight the necessity of careful preprocessing selection to maximize deep learning performance in medical imaging applications.
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.