Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34682416›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Evaluation of Feature Selection Techniques for Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.

Nahúm Cueto López, María Teresa García-Ordás, Facundo Vitelli-Storelli, Pablo Fernández-Navarro, Camilo Palazuelos, Rocío Alaiz-Rodríguez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Accurate breast cancer diagnosis using a stable feature ranking algorithm.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023
    Article
  9. ZNF143 Expression is Associated with COPD and Tumor Microenvironment in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022
    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

6 authors.

Nahúm Cueto LópezDepartment of Electrical, Systems and Automatic Engineering, Universidad of León, Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 León, Spain.
María Teresa García-OrdásDepartment of Electrical, Systems and Automatic Engineering, Universidad of León, Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 León, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-3796-3949
Facundo Vitelli-StorelliCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red (CIBER), Grupo Investigación Interacciones Gen-Ambiente y Salud (GIIGAS), Instituto de Biomedicina (IBIOMED), Universidad de León, 24071 León, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-3118-3570
Pablo Fernández-NavarroCancer and Environmental Epidemiology Unit, National Center for Epidemiology, Carlos III Institute of Health, 28903 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9427-2581
Camilo PalazuelosDepartment of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computing, University of Cantabria-IDIVAL, 39005 Santander, Spain.
Rocío Alaiz-RodríguezDepartment of Electrical, Systems and Automatic Engineering, Universidad of León, Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 León, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4164-5887

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluates several feature ranking techniques together with some classifiers based on machine learning to identify relevant factors regarding the probability of contracting breast cancer and improve the performance of risk prediction models for breast cancer in a healthy population. The dataset with 919 cases and 946 controls comes from the MCC-Spain study and includes only environmental and genetic features. Breast cancer is a major public health problem. Our aim is to analyze which factors in the cancer risk prediction model are the most important for breast cancer prediction. Likewise, quantifying the stability of feature selection methods becomes essential before trying to gain insight into the data. This paper assesses several feature selection algorithms in terms of performance for a set of predictive models. Furthermore, their robustness is quantified to analyze both the similarity between the feature selection rankings and their own stability. The ranking provided by the SVM-RFE approach leads to the best performance in terms of the area under the ROC curve (AUC) metric. Top-47 ranked features obtained with this approach fed to the Logistic Regression classifier achieve an AUC = 0.616. This means an improvement of 5.8% in comparison with the full feature set. Furthermore, the SVM-RFE ranking technique turned out to be highly stable (as well as Random Forest), whereas relief and the wrapper approaches are quite unstable. This study demonstrates that the stability and performance of the model should be studied together as Random Forest and SVM-RFE turned out to be the most stable algorithms, but in terms of model performance SVM-RFE outperforms Random Forest.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAlgorithmsArea Under CurveFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMachine LearningSupport Vector Machinebreast cancerfeature selectionrisk prediction modelstability

Identifiers

PMID34682416
PMCPMC8535206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.