Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35741300›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Machine Learning of Raman Spectroscopy Data for Classifying Cancers: A Review of the Recent Literature.

Nathan Blake, Riana Gaifulina, Lewis D Griffin, Ian M Bell, Geraint M H Thomas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Nathan BlakeDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6404-514X
Riana GaifulinaDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3927-3471
Lewis D GriffinDepartment of Computer Science, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6286-2018
Ian M BellSpectroscopy Products Division, Renishaw plc, Wotton-under-Edge GL12 8JR, UK.
Geraint M H ThomasDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4035-7832

Funding

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/R513143/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Raman Spectroscopy has long been anticipated to augment clinical decision making, such as classifying oncological samples. Unfortunately, the complexity of Raman data has thus far inhibited their routine use in clinical settings. Traditional machine learning models have been used to help exploit this information, but recent advances in deep learning have the potential to improve the field. However, there are a number of potential pitfalls with both traditional and deep learning models. We conduct a literature review to ascertain the recent machine learning methods used to classify cancers using Raman spectral data. We find that while deep learning models are popular, and ostensibly outperform traditional learning models, there are many methodological considerations which may be leading to an over-estimation of performance; primarily, small sample sizes which compound sub-optimal choices regarding sampling and validation strategies. Amongst several recommendations is a call to collate large benchmark Raman datasets, similar to those that have helped transform digital pathology, which researchers can use to develop and refine deep learning models.

Indexed as

cross-validationdeep learningdisease screening and diagnosismachine learningmedical applicationRaman Spectroscopy

Identifiers

PMID35741300
PMCPMC9222091

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.