ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021
Machine Learning Models Cannot Replace Screening Colonoscopy for the Prediction of Advanced Colorectal Adenoma.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2021. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proton-pump inhibitor exposure and prevalence of colorectal adenoma: a retrospective analysis from the Sakkopi study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Association between Diverticulosis and Colorectal Neoplasia: Analysis from a Large Austrian Database.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Association of cardiovascular health and educational status in a screening cohort.Central European journal of public health · 2024Article
- Machine Learning in Colorectal Cancer Risk Prediction from Routinely Collected Data: A Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) continues to rely on colonoscopy and/or fecal occult blood testing since other (non-invasive) risk-stratification systems have not yet been implemented into European guidelines. In this study, we evaluate the potential of machine learning (ML) methods to predict advanced adenomas (AAs) in 5862 individuals participating in a screening program for colorectal cancer. Adenomas were diagnosed histologically with an AA being ≥ 1 cm in size or with high-grade dysplasia/villous features being present. Logistic regression (LR) and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithms were evaluated for AA prediction. The mean age was 58.7 ± 9.7 years with 2811 males (48.0%), 1404 (24.0%) of whom suffered from obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²), 871 (14.9%) from diabetes, and 2095 (39.1%) from metabolic syndrome. An adenoma was detected in 1884 (32.1%), as well as AAs in 437 (7.5%). Modelling 36 laboratory parameters, eight clinical parameters, and data on eight food types/dietary patterns, moderate accuracy in predicting AAs with XGBoost and LR (AUC-ROC of 0.65-0.68) could be achieved. Limiting variables to established risk factors for AAs did not significantly improve performance. Moreover, subgroup analyses in subjects without genetic predispositions, in individuals aged 45-80 years, or in gender-specific analyses showed similar results. In conclusion, ML based on point-prevalence laboratory and clinical information does not accurately predict AAs.
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.