ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
Prediction of patient choice tendency in medical decision-making based on machine learning algorithm.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence and medical futility.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Review
- From inferring preferences to enabling choice: potentials of digital tools to improve substitute decision-making.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Application of artificial intelligence to measure and predict patient values and preferences: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Patients' Preferences Regarding Traditional Chinese Medicine for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Classification of psychiatry clinical notes by diagnosis: a deep learning and machine learning approach.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of esophageal cancer patients regarding pulmonary rehabilitation training.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Machine learning (ML) algorithms, as an early branch of artificial intelligence technology, can effectively simulate human behavior by training on data from the training set. Machine learning algorithms were used in this study to predict patient choice tendencies in medical decision-making. Its goal was to help physicians understand patient preferences and to serve as a resource for the development of decision-making schemes in clinical treatment. As a result, physicians and patients can have better conversations at lower expenses, leading to better medical decisions. Method: Patient medical decision-making tendencies were predicted by primary survey data obtained from 248 participants at third-level grade-A hospitals in China. Specifically, 12 predictor variables were set according to the literature review, and four types of outcome variables were set based on the optimization principle of clinical diagnosis and treatment. That is, the patient's medical decision-making tendency, which is classified as treatment effect, treatment cost, treatment side effect, and treatment experience. In conjunction with the study's data characteristics, three ML classification algorithms, decision tree (DT), k-nearest neighbor (KNN), and support vector machine (SVM), were used to predict patients' medical decision-making tendency, and the performance of the three types of algorithms was compared. Results: The accuracy of the DT algorithm for predicting patients' choice tendency in medical decision making is 80% for treatment effect, 60% for treatment cost, 56% for treatment side effects, and 60% for treatment experience, followed by the KNN algorithm at 78%, 66%, 74%, 84%, and the SVM algorithm at 82%, 76%, 80%, 94%. At the same time, the comprehensive evaluation index F1-score of the DT algorithm are 0.80, 0.61, 0.58, 0.60, the KNN algorithm are 0.75, 0.65, 0.71, 0.84, and the SVM algorithm are 0.81, 0.74, 0.73, 0.94. Conclusion: Among the three ML classification algorithms, SVM has the highest accuracy and the best performance. Therefore, the prediction results have certain reference values and guiding significance for physicians to formulate clinical treatment plans. The research results are helpful to promote the development and application of a patient-centered medical decision assistance system, to resolve the conflict of interests between physicians and patients and assist them to realize scientific decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.