ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019
Machine learning in medicine: a practical introduction.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 514 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
514 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based tools in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Machine learning for the prediction of acute kidney injury post cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Machine learning for predictive risk stratification in recurrent miscarriage: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Research on machine learning-based clinical prediction models: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Systematic review and comparison of machine learning and conventional statistical models for predicting cardiovascular events in dialysis patients.Renal failure · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnosis melanoma with artificial intelligence systems: A meta-analysis study and systematic review.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025Pooled it
- Methodological and applicability pitfalls of clinical prediction models for asthma diagnosis: a systematic review and critical appraisal of evidence.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Pooled it
- Machine Learning for Predicting Stillbirth: A Systematic Review.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2025Pooled it
- Text-Based Depression Prediction on Social Media Using Machine Learning: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Prediction models for treatment response in migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of machine learning-based prognostic models for acute pancreatitis: Towards improving methods and reporting quality.PLoS medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Advanced applications in chronic disease monitoring using IoT mobile sensing device data, machine learning algorithms and frame theory: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Revolutionizing Lung Cancer Detection: A High-Accuracy Machine Learning Framework for Early Diagnosis.BioMed research international · 2025Pooled it
- The role of nutritional and inflammatory markers in predicting postoperative complications after esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: mechanisms, clinical applications, and future perspectives.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Prediction Models for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Systematic Review of Traditional and Machine Learning Approaches.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2026Review
- The role and utility of artificial intelligence and machine learning for diagnostic prediction in general practice.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- Using Machine Learning to Predict Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema Following Axillary Lymph Node Dissection.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- AI-based anatomical recognition for bladder neck dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.BJU international · 2026Article
- Machine Learning Evaluation of Semen Analysis Could Reveal New Infertility-Related Markers: A Pilot Study.The world journal of men's health · 2026Article
- Machine Learning for Predicting Mortality Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Scoping Review of Current Literature.CJC open · 2026Review
454 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFollowing visible successes on a wide range of predictive tasks, machine learning techniques are attracting substantial interest from medical researchers and clinicians. We address the need for capacity development in this area by providing a conceptual introduction to machine learning alongside a practical guide to developing and evaluating predictive algorithms using freely-available open source software and public domain data.
methodsWe demonstrate the use of machine learning techniques by developing three predictive models for cancer diagnosis using descriptions of nuclei sampled from breast masses. These algorithms include regularized General Linear Model regression (GLMs), Support Vector Machines (SVMs) with a radial basis function kernel, and single-layer Artificial Neural Networks. The publicly-available dataset describing the breast mass samples (N=683) was randomly split into evaluation (n=456) and validation (n=227) samples. We trained algorithms on data from the evaluation sample before they were used to predict the diagnostic outcome in the validation dataset. We compared the predictions made on the validation datasets with the real-world diagnostic decisions to calculate the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the three models. We explored the use of averaging and voting ensembles to improve predictive performance. We provide a step-by-step guide to developing algorithms using the open-source R statistical programming environment.
resultsThe trained algorithms were able to classify cell nuclei with high accuracy (.94 -.96), sensitivity (.97 -.99), and specificity (.85 -.94). Maximum accuracy (.96) and area under the curve (.97) was achieved using the SVM algorithm. Prediction performance increased marginally (accuracy =.97, sensitivity =.99, specificity =.95) when algorithms were arranged into a voting ensemble.
conclusionsWe use a straightforward example to demonstrate the theory and practice of machine learning for clinicians and medical researchers. The principals which we demonstrate here can be readily applied to other complex tasks including natural language processing and image recognition.
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.