ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017
E-Science technologies in a workflow for personalized medicine using cancer screening as a case study.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. 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.
- Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging Based Radiomic Models of Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe provide an e-Science perspective on the workflow from risk factor discovery and classification of disease to evaluation of personalized intervention programs. As case studies, we use personalized prostate and breast cancer screenings. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe describe an e-Science initiative in Sweden, e-Science for Cancer Prevention and Control (eCPC), which supports biomarker discovery and offers decision support for personalized intervention strategies. The generic eCPC contribution is a workflow with 4 nodes applied iteratively, and the concept of e-Science signifies systematic use of tools from the mathematical, statistical, data, and computer sciences.
resultsThe eCPC workflow is illustrated through 2 case studies. For prostate cancer, an in-house personalized screening tool, the Stockholm-3 model (S3M), is presented as an alternative to prostate-specific antigen testing alone. S3M is evaluated in a trial setting and plans for rollout in the population are discussed. For breast cancer, new biomarkers based on breast density and molecular profiles are developed and the US multicenter Women Informed to Screen Depending on Measures (WISDOM) trial is referred to for evaluation. While current eCPC data management uses a traditional data warehouse model, we discuss eCPC-developed features of a coherent data integration platform. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionE-Science tools are a key part of an evidence-based process for personalized medicine. This paper provides a structured workflow from data and models to evaluation of new personalized intervention strategies. The importance of multidisciplinary collaboration is emphasized. Importantly, the generic concepts of the suggested eCPC workflow are transferrable to other disease domains, although each disease will require tailored solutions.
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.