ReviewMedical & biological engineering & computing2020
A mapping study of ensemble classification methods in lung cancer decision support systems.
Review in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Constrained Disorder Principle Overcomes the Challenges of Methods for Assessing Uncertainty in Biological Systems.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Comparison of whole blood and serum samples of breast cancer based on laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy with machine learning.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Computer Based Diagnosis of Some Chronic Diseases: A Medical Journey of the Last Two Decades.Archives of computational methods in engineering : state of the art reviews · 2022Review
- Experimental Study and Comparison of Imbalance Ensemble Classifiers with Dynamic Selection Strategy.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Achieving a high level of classification accuracy in medical datasets is a capital need for researchers to provide effective decision systems to assist doctors in work. In many domains of artificial intelligence, ensemble classification methods are able to improve the performance of single classifiers. This paper reports the state of the art of ensemble classification methods in lung cancer detection. We have performed a systematic mapping study to identify the most interesting papers concerning this topic. A total of 65 papers published between 2000 and 2018 were selected after an automatic search in four digital libraries and a careful selection process. As a result, it was observed that diagnosis was the task most commonly studied; homogeneous ensembles and decision trees were the most frequently adopted for constructing ensembles; and the majority voting rule was the predominant combination rule. Few studies considered the parameter tuning of the techniques used. These findings open several perspectives for researchers to enhance lung cancer research by addressing the identified gaps, such as investigating different classification methods, proposing other heterogeneous ensemble methods, and using new combination rules. Graphical abstract Main features of the mapping study performed in ensemble classification methods applied on lung cancer decision support systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32621068What 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.