Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36017156›Full record

ArticleComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022

Predicting Breast Cancer Leveraging Supervised Machine Learning Techniques.

Sanam Aamir, Aqsa Rahim, Zain Aamir, Saadullah Farooq Abbasi, Muhammad Shahbaz Khan, Majed Alhaisoni, Muhammad Attique Khan, Khyber Khan, Jawad Ahmad

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Research on ultrasound-based radiomics: a bibliometric analysis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Sanam AamirDepartment of Computer and Software Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5129-2109
Aqsa RahimFaculty of Science and Technology, University of Tromsø, Tromso, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1111-2185
Zain AamirDepartment of Data Science, National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9079-227X
Saadullah Farooq AbbasiDepartment of Electrical Engineering, National University of Technology, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9814-3023
Muhammad Shahbaz KhanDepartment of Electrical Engineering, HITEC University, Taxila 47080, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7166-6681
Majed AlhaisoniComputer Sciences Department, College of Computer and Information Sciences, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0231-6899
Muhammad Attique KhanComputer Sciences Department, College of Computer and Information Sciences, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6347-4890
Khyber KhanDepartment of Computer Science, Khurasan University, Jalalabad, Afghanistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7980-4121
Jawad AhmadSchool of Computing, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh EH10 5DT, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6289-8248
Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University · SAEdinburgh Napier University · GBKhurasan University · AFNational University of Computer and Emerging Sciences · PKNational University of Sciences and Technology · PKNational University of Technology · PKUiT The Arctic University of Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is one of the leading causes of increasing deaths in women worldwide. The complex nature (microcalcification and masses) of breast cancer cells makes it quite difficult for radiologists to diagnose it properly. Subsequently, various computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems have previously been developed and are being used to aid radiologists in the diagnosis of cancer cells. However, due to intrinsic risks associated with the delayed and/or incorrect diagnosis, it is indispensable to improve the developed diagnostic systems. In this regard, machine learning has recently been playing a potential role in the early and precise detection of breast cancer. This paper presents a new machine learning-based framework that utilizes the Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, Support Vector Machine, Artificial Neural Network, and Multilayer Perception approaches to efficiently predict breast cancer from the patient data. For this purpose, the Wisconsin Diagnostic Breast Cancer (WDBC) dataset has been utilized and classified using a hybrid Multilayer Perceptron Model (MLP) and 5-fold cross-validation framework as a working prototype. For the improved classification, a connection-based feature selection technique has been used that also eliminates the recursive features. The proposed framework has been validated on two separate datasets, i.e., the Wisconsin Prognostic dataset (WPBC) and Wisconsin Original Breast Cancer (WOBC) datasets. The results demonstrate improved accuracy of 99.12% due to efficient data preprocessing and feature selection applied to the input data.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsBreastDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansNeural Networks, ComputerSupport Vector Machine

Identifiers

PMID36017156
PMCPMC9398810
OpenAlexW4293062801

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.