Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Brain MR images are the most suitable method for detecting chronic nerve diseases such as brain tumors, strokes, dementia, and multiple sclerosis. They are also used as the most sensitive method in evaluating diseases of the pituitary gland, brain vessels, eye, and inner ear organs. Many medical image analysis methods based on deep learning techniques have been proposed for health monitoring and diagnosis from brain MRI images. CNNs (Convolutional Neural Networks) are a sub-branch of deep learning and are often used to analyze visual information. Common uses include image and video recognition, suggestive systems, image classification, medical image analysis, and natural language processing. In this study, a new modular deep learning model was created to retain the existing advantages of known transfer learning methods (DenseNet, VGG16, and basic CNN architectures) in the classification process of MR images and eliminate their disadvantages. Open-source brain tumor images taken from the Kaggle database were used. For the training of the model, two types of splitting were utilized. First, 80% of the MRI image dataset was used in the training phase and 20% in the testing phase. Secondly, 10-fold cross-validation was used. When the proposed deep learning model and other known transfer learning methods were tested on the same MRI dataset, an improvement in classification performance was obtained, but an increase in processing time was observed.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 43/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 25 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 43 of 100. Total 43 of 100.25 of the 58 points we could judge = 43 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Life (Basel, Switzerland))
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 3 / 5 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 36836705)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 25 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total 43 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Özkaraca, O., Oİ, B., Gürüler, H., Khan, F., Hussain, J., Khan, J., et al. (2023). Multiple Brain Tumor Classification with Dense CNN Architecture Using Brain MRI Images. Life (Basel, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/life13020349

Vancouver

Özkaraca O, Oİ B, Gürüler H, Khan F, Hussain J, Khan J, et al. Multiple Brain Tumor Classification with Dense CNN Architecture Using Brain MRI Images. Life (Basel, Switzerland). 2023. doi:10.3390/life13020349. PMID: 36836705.

BibTeX

@article{ozkaraca2023-36836705,
  author  = {Özkaraca, O. and Oİ, Bağrıaçık and Gürüler, H. and Khan, F. and Hussain, J. and Khan, J. and Laila, U. E.},
  title   = {{Multiple Brain Tumor Classification with Dense CNN Architecture Using Brain MRI Images}},
  journal = {Life (Basel, Switzerland)},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.3390/life13020349},
  pmid    = {36836705},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/life13020349}
}

Related studies in Digital health tools

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →