ReviewCureus2022
Classification Performance of Neural Networks Versus Logistic Regression Models: Evidence From Healthcare Practice.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global performance of machine learning models to predict all-cause mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Prioritising Data Quality Governance for AI in Prostate Cancer: A Methodological Proof-of-Concept Study Using Neural Networks for Risk Stratification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- High-resolution mapping of introduced buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris) in central Australia.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2026Article
- Machine learning models for predicting new-onset diabetes following acute pancreatitis using real-world data.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Transforming Endoscopic Image Classification with Spectrum-Aided Vision for Early and Accurate Cancer Identification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Integration of urine retinol-binding protein and genetic markers for early prediction of tacrolimus nephrotoxicity using machine learning.Translational pediatrics · 2025Article
- Cognitive constraints in bilingual processing-an entropy-based discrimination between translation and second language production.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Applying machine learning to construct an association model for lung cancer and environmental hormone high-risk factors and nursing assessment reconstruction.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2025Review
- Taba Binary, Multinomial, and Ordinal Regression Models: New Machine Learning Methods for Classification.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A machine learning approach towards assessing consistency and reproducibility: an application to graft survival across three kidney transplantation eras.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Machine learning encompasses statistical approaches such as logistic regression (LR) through to more computationally complex models such as neural networks (NN). The aim of this study is to review current published evidence for performance from studies directly comparing logistic regression, and neural network classification approaches in medicine. A literature review was carried out to identify primary research studies which provided information regarding comparative area under the curve (AUC) values for the overall performance of both LR and NN for a defined clinical healthcare-related problem. Following an initial search, articles were reviewed to remove those that did not meet the criteria and performance metrics were extracted from the included articles. Teh initial search revealed 114 articles; 21 studies were included in the study. In 13/21 (62%) of cases, NN had a greater AUC compared to LR, but in most the difference was small and unlikely to be of clinical significance; (unweighted mean difference in AUC 0.03 (95% CI 0-0.06) in favour of NN versus LR. In the majority of cases examined across a range of clinical settings, LR models provide reasonable performance that is only marginally improved using more complex methods such as NN. In many circumstances, the use of a relatively simple LR model is likely to be adequate for real-world needs but in specific circumstances in which large amounts of data are available, and where even small increases in performance would provide significant management value, the application of advanced analytic tools such as NNs may be indicated.
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.