Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36845729›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2023

Common statistical concepts in the supervised Machine Learning arena.

Hooman H Rashidi, Samer Albahra, Scott Robertson, Nam K Tran, Bo Hu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A Computer Vision and Machine Learning Approach to Classify Views in Distal Radius Radiographs.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Artificial intelligence in pediatric allergy research.European journal of pediatrics · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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.

Hooman H RashidiPathology and Laboratory Medicine Institute (PLMI), Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Samer AlbahraPathology and Laboratory Medicine Institute (PLMI), Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Scott RobertsonPathology and Laboratory Medicine Institute (PLMI), Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Nam K TranPathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, United States.
Bo HuPLMI's Center for Artificial Intelligence & Data Science, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the core elements of Machine Learning (ML) is statistics and its embedded foundational rules and without its appropriate integration, ML as we know would not exist. Various aspects of ML platforms are based on statistical rules and most notably the end results of the ML model performance cannot be objectively assessed without appropriate statistical measurements. The scope of statistics within the ML realm is rather broad and cannot be adequately covered in a single review article. Therefore, here we will mainly focus on the common statistical concepts that pertain to supervised ML (i.e. classification and regression) along with their interdependencies and certain limitations.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceclassificationMachine Learningmodel evaluationsregressionstatistics

Identifiers

PMID36845729
PMCPMC9949554

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.