ArticleCancers2020
Comparison of the Tree-Based Machine Learning Algorithms to Cox Regression in Predicting the Survival of Oral and Pharyngeal Cancers: Analyses Based on SEER Database.
Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 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
52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review of prognostic models for predicting recurrence and survival in patients with treated oropharyngeal cancer.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Prognosing post-treatment outcomes of head and neck cancer using structured data and machine learning: A systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Prediction of lung papillary adenocarcinoma-specific survival using ensemble machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Comparison of the Cox Proportional Hazards Model and Random Survival Forest Algorithm for Predicting Patient-Specific Survival Probabilities in Clinical Trial Data.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2026Article
- Predicting 30-day readmission after heart failure hospitalization using interpretable machine learning: evidence from a 20-year population-based rural registry.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of Surgical Resection on 5-Year Survival in Elderly NSCLC Patients: A SEER Database Analysis With Machine Learning-Based Predictive Modeling in Patients Aged ≥ 60 (2000-2021).Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Risk prediction of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury: development, validation of a machine learning model with multicenter data.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based risk prediction of 28-day mortality for sepsis patients with augmented renal clearance.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Transforming Intracerebral Hemorrhage Care with Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Explainable machine learning-based mortality risk stratification for older adults with COVID-19: pinpointing core immunological biomarkers and revealing dose-threshold effects.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Interpretable machine learning for the early prediction of acute kidney injury in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Development of machine learning models for survival prediction in nasopharyngeal carcinoma using population-based data.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Machine learning for the prediction of augmented renal clearance (ARC) in patients with sepsis in critical care units.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Machine learning model to predict sepsis in ICU patients with intracerebral hemorrhage.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Predictive Models for Survival in Patients with Brain Stroke.Health promotion perspectives · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Machine Learning and Traditional Statistical Models to Assess the Value of Stroke Genetic Liability for Prediction of Risk of Stroke Within the UK Biobank.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Predicting overall survival in anaplastic thyroid cancer using machine learning approaches.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Developing clinical prognostic models to predict graft survival after renal transplantation: comparison of statistical and machine learning models.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to demonstrate the use of the tree-based machine learning algorithms to predict the 3- and 5-year disease-specific survival of oral and pharyngeal cancers (OPCs) and compare their performance with the traditional Cox regression. A total of 21,154 individuals diagnosed with OPCs between 2004 and 2009 were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Three tree-based machine learning algorithms (survival tree (ST), random forest (RF) and conditional inference forest (CF)), together with a reference technique (Cox proportional hazard models (Cox)), were used to develop the survival prediction models. To handle the missing values in predictors, we applied the substantive model compatible version of the fully conditional specification imputation approach to the Cox model, whereas we used RF to impute missing data for the ST, RF and CF models. For internal validation, we used 10-fold cross-validation with 50 iterations in the model development datasets. Following this, model performance was evaluated using the C-index, integrated Brier score (IBS) and calibration curves in the test datasets. For predicting the 3-year survival of OPCs with the complete cases, the C-index in the development sets were 0.77 (0.77, 0.77), 0.70 (0.70, 0.70), 0.83 (0.83, 0.84) and 0.83 (0.83, 0.86) for Cox, ST, RF and CF, respectively. Similar results were observed in the 5-year survival prediction models, with C-index for Cox, ST, RF and CF being 0.76 (0.76, 0.76), 0.69 (0.69, 0.70), 0.83 (0.83, 0.83) and 0.85 (0.84, 0.86), respectively, in development datasets. The prediction error curves based on IBS showed a similar pattern for these models. The predictive performance remained unchanged in the analyses with imputed data. Additionally, a free web-based calculator was developed for potential clinical use. In conclusion, compared to Cox regression, ST had a lower and RF and CF had a higher predictive accuracy in predicting the 3- and 5-year OPCs survival using SEER data. The RF and CF algorithms provide non-parametric alternatives to Cox regression to be of clinical use for estimating the survival probability of OPCs patients.
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.