Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 4, 2025
Application of Deep Learning-Based Medical Image Segmentation via Orbital Computed Tomography
Published on: November 30, 2022
Deep-learning models for image-based gynecological cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta- analysis
Asefa Adimasu Taddese1,2, Binyam Chakilu Tilahun1,2, Tadesse Awoke3
1Department of Health Informatics, Institute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Introduction:
Gynecological cancers pose a significant threat to women worldwide, especially those in resource-limited settings. Human analysis of images remains the primary method of diagnosis, but it can be inconsistent and inaccurate. Deep learning (DL) can potentially enhance image-based diagnosis by providing objective and accurate results. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the recent advances of deep learning (DL) techniques for gynecological cancer diagnosis using various images and explore their future implications.
Methods:
The study followed the PRISMA-2 guidelines, and the protocol was registered in PROSPERO. Five databases were searched for articles published from January 2018 to December 2022. Articles that focused on five types of gynecological cancer and used DL for diagnosis were selected. Two reviewers assessed the articles for eligibility and quality using the QUADAS-2 tool. Data was extracted from each study, and the performance of DL techniques for gynecological cancer classification was estimated by pooling and transforming sensitivity and specificity values using a random-effects model.
Results:
The review included 48 studies, and the meta-analysis included 24 studies. The studies used different images and models to diagnose different gynecological cancers. The most popular models were ResNet, VGGNet, and UNet. DL algorithms showed more sensitivity but less specificity compared to machine learning (ML) methods. The AUC of the summary receiver operating characteristic plot was higher for DL algorithms than for ML methods. Of the 48 studies included, 41 were at low risk of bias.
Conclusion:
This review highlights the potential of DL in improving the screening and diagnosis of gynecological cancer, particularly in resource-limited settings. However, the high heterogeneity and quality of the studies could affect the validity of the results. Further research is necessary to validate the findings of this study and to explore the potential of DL in improving gynecological cancer diagnosis.
