ArticleCancer management and research2022
A Predictive Model for Qualitative Evaluation of PG-SGA in Tumor Patients Through Machine Learning.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) was a nutritional status assessment technique specifically tailored for patients with oncology. The goal of this study was to develop a machine learning (ML) prediction model for predicting PG-SGA categorization of patients with tumor. Methods: From 2014 to 2020, patients at the First Hospital of Jilin University performed laboratory testing, bioelectrical impedance, physical measures, and the PG-SGA scale. A total of 8230 patients were involved in the study. Patients with missing or partial data were removed, leaving 7287 patients, of which 3743 were males and 3544 were females. ML was used to design a clinical prediction model for PG-SGA categories. Results: Through the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and the correlation matrix, 135 variables were screened and 6 variables were retained; ML was performed among the remaining variables. The accuracy of neural network prediction models was 70.3% and 70.4% for males and females in the training cohort, respectively, and 74.4% and 73.2% for males and females in the validation cohort, respectively. The area under curve (AUC) of males was 0.87 for PG-SGA scores "0-3", 0.70 for PG-SGA scores "4-8" and 0.74 for PG-SGA scores ">8". As for females, the AUC was 0.85 for PG-SGA scores "0-3", 0.65 for PG-SGA scores "4-8" and 0.76 for PG-SGA scores ">8". The results of confusion matrix showed that the models were of good predictive validity. The prediction model was nearly 90% accurate for predictions that do not require nutritional support. Conclusion: We demonstrated that neural network learning is the best clinical prediction model using ML. The model can work as a prediction for the PG-SGA classification of patients with cancer and can be promoted further in the clinic.
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.