ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2016
Using Active Learning for Speeding up Calibration in Simulation Models.
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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- 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 · 2023Article
- Active Learning for Multi-way Sensitivity Analysis with Application to Disease Screening Modeling.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2022Article
- The impact of vaccination to control COVID-19 burden in the United States: A simulation modeling approach.PloS one · 2021Article
- Novel microsimulation model of tobacco use behaviours and outcomes: calibration and validation in a US population.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Multiobjective Calibration of Disease Simulation Models Using Gaussian Processes.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2019Article
- High-throughput cancer hypothesis testing with an integrated PhysiCell-EMEWS workflow.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- Extreme-scale Dynamic Exploration of a Distributed Agent-based Model with the EMEWS Framework.IEEE transactions on computational social systems · 2018Article
- The University of Wisconsin Breast Cancer Epidemiology Simulation Model: An Update.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018Article
- Bayesian Methods for Calibrating Health Policy Models: A Tutorial.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- The Use of Survival Dose-Rate Dependencies as Theoretical Discrimination Criteria forDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.