Table 3. Comparison with other studies.
| References | Dataset | Method and Methods Used | Accuracy | Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jasil and Ulagamuthalvi [49] | ISIC | Transfer learning | 77 | - |
| Dubal et al. [50] | - | Neural Networks | 76.9 | - |
| Brinker et al. [51] | ISBI2016 | CNN | 83.9 | 56 |
| Gupta et al. [53] | ISIC2016 | Ensemble techniques | 87 | 67 |
| Murugan et al. [54] | ISIC | Random Forest | 76.87 | 78.43 |
| Mustafa et al. [55] | - | SVM | 80.00 | 71.43 |
| Linsangan and Adtoon [56] | ISIC archive | KNN | 86.67 | - |
| Shalu and Kamboj [57] | MED-NODE | Decision Tree | 82.35 | - |
| Proposed method | ISIC | DenseNet-201+ Lasso+ Ensemble learning | 87.72 | 92.15 |