Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36146145›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

An Interpretable Two-Phase Modeling Approach for Lung Cancer Survivability Prediction.

Zahra Sedighi-Maman, Jonathan J Heath

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Zahra Sedighi-MamanRobert B. Willumstad School of Business, Adelphi University, Garden City, NY 11530, USA.
Jonathan J HeathMcDonough School of Business, Georgetown University, Washington, DC 20057, USA.

Funding

Adelphi University Internal Faculty Development Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although lung cancer survival status and survival length predictions have primarily been studied individually, a scheme that leverages both fields in an interpretable way for physicians remains elusive. We propose a two-phase data analytic framework that is capable of classifying survival status for 0.5-, 1-, 1.5-, 2-, 2.5-, and 3-year time-points (phase I) and predicting the number of survival months within 3 years (phase II) using recent Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data from 2010 to 2017. In this study, we employ three analytical models (general linear model, extreme gradient boosting, and artificial neural networks), five data balancing techniques (synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE), relocating safe level SMOTE, borderline SMOTE, adaptive synthetic sampling, and majority weighted minority oversampling technique), two feature selection methods (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and random forest), and the one-hot encoding approach. By implementing a comprehensive data preparation phase, we demonstrate that a computationally efficient and interpretable method such as GLM performs comparably to more complex models. Moreover, we quantify the effects of individual features in phase I and II by exploiting GLM coefficients. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to (a) implement a comprehensive data processing approach to develop performant, computationally efficient, and interpretable methods in comparison to black-box models, (b) visualize top factors impacting survival odds by utilizing the change in odds ratio, and (c) comprehensively explore short-term lung cancer survival using a two-phase approach.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsHumansLinear ModelsNeural Networks, Computerlung cancerone-hot encodingSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)survival predictionunbalanced data

Identifiers

PMID36146145
PMCPMC9503480

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.