Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36531037›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Construction of machine learning-based models for cancer outcomes in low and lower-middle income countries: A scoping review.

John Adeoye, Abdulwarith Akinshipo, Mohamad Koohi-Moghadam, Peter Thomson, Yu-Xiong Su

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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.

John AdeoyeDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Abdulwarith AkinshipoDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology and Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria.
Mohamad Koohi-MoghadamDivision of Applied Oral Sciences and Community Dental Care, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Peter ThomsonCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland, Australia.
Yu-Xiong SuDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The impact and utility of machine learning (ML)-based prediction tools for cancer outcomes including assistive diagnosis, risk stratification, and adjunctive decision-making have been largely described and realized in the high income and upper-middle-income countries. However, statistical projections have estimated higher cancer incidence and mortality risks in low and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs). Therefore, this review aimed to evaluate the utilization, model construction methods, and degree of implementation of ML-based models for cancer outcomes in LLMICs. Methods: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched and articles describing the use of ML-based models for cancer among local populations in LLMICs between 2002 and 2022 were included. A total of 140 articles from 22,516 citations that met the eligibility criteria were included in this study. Results: ML-based models from LLMICs were often based on traditional ML algorithms than deep or deep hybrid learning. We found that the construction of ML-based models was skewed to particular LLMICs such as India, Iran, Pakistan, and Egypt with a paucity of applications in sub-Saharan Africa. Moreover, models for breast, head and neck, and brain cancer outcomes were frequently explored. Many models were deemed suboptimal according to the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment tool (PROBAST) due to sample size constraints and technical flaws in ML modeling even though their performance accuracy ranged from 0.65 to 1.00. While the development and internal validation were described for all models included (n=137), only 4.4% (6/137) have been validated in independent cohorts and 0.7% (1/137) have been assessed for clinical impact and efficacy. Conclusion: Overall, the application of ML for modeling cancer outcomes in LLMICs is increasing. However, model development is largely unsatisfactory. We recommend model retraining using larger sample sizes, intensified external validation practices, and increased impact assessment studies using randomized controlled trial designs. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=308345, identifier CRD42022308345.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecancerlower-middle-income countrieslow-income countriesmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID36531037
PMCPMC9751812

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.