Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31154550›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical systems2019

Multiclass Benchmarking Framework for Automated Acute Leukaemia Detection and Classification Based on BWM and Group-VIKOR.

M A Alsalem, A A Zaidan, B B Zaidan, O S Albahri, A H Alamoodi, A S Albahri, A H Mohsin, K I Mohammed

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical systems, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

8 authors.

M A AlsalemDepartment of Computing, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia.
A A ZaidanDepartment of Computing, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia. aws.alaa@gmail.com.
B B ZaidanDepartment of Computing, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia.
O S AlbahriDepartment of Computing, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia.
A H AlamoodiDepartment of Computing, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia.
A S AlbahriCollege of Engineering, University of Information Technology and Communications, Baghdad, Iraq.
A H MohsinRepublic of Iraq-Presidency of Ministries - Establishment of Martyrs, Baghdad, Iraq.
K I MohammedDepartment of Computing, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper aims to assist the administration departments of medical organisations in making the right decision on selecting a suitable multiclass classification model for acute leukaemia. In this paper, we proposed a framework that will aid these departments in evaluating, benchmarking and ranking available multiclass classification models for the selection of the best one. Medical organisations have continuously faced evaluation and benchmarking challenges in such endeavour, especially when no single model is superior. Moreover, the improper selection of multiclass classification for acute leukaemia model may be costly for medical organisations. For example, when a patient dies, one such organisation will be legally or financially sued for incidents in which the model fails to fulfil its desired outcome. With regard to evaluation and benchmarking, multiclass classification models are challenging processes due to multiple evaluation and conflicting criteria. This study structured a decision matrix (DM) based on the crossover of 2 groups of multi-evaluation criteria and 22 multiclass classification models. The matrix was then evaluated with datasets comprising 72 samples of acute leukaemia, which include 5327 gens. Subsequently, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques are used in the benchmarking and ranking of multiclass classification models. The MCDM used techniques that include the integrated BWM and VIKOR. BWM has been applied for the weight calculations of evaluation criteria, whereas VIKOR has been used to benchmark and rank classification models. VIKOR has also been employed in two decision-making contexts: individual and group decision making and internal and external group aggregation. Results showed the following: (1) the integration of BWM and VIKOR is effective at solving the benchmarking/selection problems of multiclass classification models. (2) The ranks of classification models obtained from internal and external VIKOR group decision making were almost the same, and the best multiclass classification model based on the two was 'Bayes. Naive Byes Updateable' and the worst one was 'Trees.LMT'. (3) Among the scores of groups in the objective validation, significant differences were identified, which indicated that the ranking results of internal and external VIKOR group decision making were valid.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesBayes TheoremHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsAcute leukaemiaBenchmarkingBWMClassificationMulticlass evaluationVIKOR

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.