Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26471190›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2016

Using Active Learning for Speeding up Calibration in Simulation Models.

Mucahit Cevik, Mehmet Ali Ergun, Natasha K Stout, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Mark Craven, Oguzhan Alagoz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  2. Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies Using Active Learning and Monte Carlo Simulation.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Article
  3. Modeling Thyroid Cancer Epidemiology in the United States Using Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma Microsimulation Model.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2024
    Article
  4. Calibration and Validation of the Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Incidence and Mortality (CRC-AIM) Microsimulation Model Using Deep Neural Networks.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Multiobjective Calibration of Disease Simulation Models Using Gaussian Processes.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The University of Wisconsin Breast Cancer Epidemiology Simulation Model: An Update.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. The Use of Survival Dose-Rate Dependencies as Theoretical Discrimination Criteria forDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mucahit CevikDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA (MC, MAE, OA)
Mehmet Ali ErgunDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA (MC, MAE, OA)
Natasha K StoutDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA (NKS)
Amy Trentham-DietzDepartment of Population Health Sciences and Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA (AT-D, OA)
Mark CravenDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA (MC)
Oguzhan AlagozDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA (MC, MAE, OA)

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI AMY TRENTHAM-DIETZ · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$32.2M
INSTITUTIONAL CTSA (UW-MADISON): CLINICAL TRIALSUL1RR025011 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2007 to 2011
$29.5M
Comparative Modeling: Informing Breast Cancer Control Practice & PolicyU01CA152958 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI BERRY, DONALD A, DE KONING, HARRY J · 2010 to 2015
$7.6M
Vermont Screening Process Documentation UnitU54CA163303 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI SPRAGUE, BRIAN L · 2011 to 2017
$6.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000427NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NCI NIH HHS U01 CA152958NCI NIH HHS U54 CA163303NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR025011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost cancer simulation models include unobservable parameters that determine disease onset and tumor growth. These parameters play an important role in matching key outcomes such as cancer incidence and mortality, and their values are typically estimated via a lengthy calibration procedure, which involves evaluating a large number of combinations of parameter values via simulation. The objective of this study is to demonstrate how machine learning approaches can be used to accelerate the calibration process by reducing the number of parameter combinations that are actually evaluated.

methodsActive learning is a popular machine learning method that enables a learning algorithm such as artificial neural networks to interactively choose which parameter combinations to evaluate. We developed an active learning algorithm to expedite the calibration process. Our algorithm determines the parameter combinations that are more likely to produce desired outputs and therefore reduces the number of simulation runs performed during calibration. We demonstrate our method using the previously developed University of Wisconsin breast cancer simulation model (UWBCS).

resultsIn a recent study, calibration of the UWBCS required the evaluation of 378 000 input parameter combinations to build a race-specific model, and only 69 of these combinations produced results that closely matched observed data. By using the active learning algorithm in conjunction with standard calibration methods, we identify all 69 parameter combinations by evaluating only 5620 of the 378 000 combinations.

conclusionMachine learning methods hold potential in guiding model developers in the selection of more promising parameter combinations and hence speeding up the calibration process. Applying our machine learning algorithm to one model shows that evaluating only 1.49% of all parameter combinations would be sufficient for the calibration.

Indexed as

LearningModels, TheoreticalAlgorithmsCalibrationHumansNeural Networks, Computeractive learningartificial neural networkscalibrationcancer simulationmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID26471190
PMCPMC4833719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.