ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2015
Developing a utility decision framework to evaluate predictive models in breast cancer risk estimation.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance metric curve analysis framework to assess impact of the decision variable threshold, disease prevalence, and dataset variability in two-class classification.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2022Article
- A Utility/Cost Analysis of Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Algorithms.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Combining imaging and genetic information to predict disease presence and progression is being codified into an emerging discipline called "radiogenomics." Optimal evaluation methodologies for radiogenomics have not been well established. We aim to develop a decision framework based on utility analysis to assess predictive models for breast cancer diagnosis. We garnered Gail risk factors, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and mammographic features from a retrospective case-control study. We constructed three logistic regression models built on different sets of predictive features: (1) Gail, (2) Gail + Mammo, and (3) Gail + Mammo + SNP. Then we generated receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for three models. After we assigned utility values for each category of outcomes (true negatives, false positives, false negatives, and true positives), we pursued optimal operating points on ROC curves to achieve maximum expected utility of breast cancer diagnosis. We performed McNemar's test based on threshold levels at optimal operating points, and found that SNPs and mammographic features played a significant role in breast cancer risk estimation. Our study comprising utility analysis and McNemar's test provides a decision framework to evaluate predictive models in breast cancer risk estimation.
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.