Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37190559›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2023

The Performance of Different Machine Learning Algorithm and Regression Models in Predicting High-Grade Intracranial Meningioma.

Haibo Teng, Xiang Yang, Zhiyong Liu, Hao Liu, Ouying Yan, Danyang Jie, Xueying Li, Jianguo Xu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. An explainable predictive machine learning model of oxaliplatin induced peripheral neuropathy based on clinical data: a retrospective single center.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Haibo TengDepartment of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9220-2800
Xiang YangDepartment of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.
Zhiyong LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.
Hao LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.
Ouying YanDepartment of Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Danyang JieDepartment of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.
Xueying LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.
Jianguo XuDepartment of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospital,Sichuan University ZYJC18007National Natural Science Foundation of China 82002638
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meningioma is the most common primary tumor of the central nervous system (CNS). Individualized treatment strategies should be formulated for the patients according to the WHO (World Health Organization) grade. Our aim was to investigate the effectiveness of various machine learning and traditional statistical models in predicting the WHO grade of preoperative patients with meningioma. Patients diagnosed with meningioma after surgery in West China Hospital and Shangjin Hospital of Sichuan University from 2009 to 2016 were included in the study cohort. As the training cohort (n = 1975), independent risk factors associated with high-grade meningioma were used to establish the Nomogram model. which was validated in a subsequent cohort (n = 1048) from 2017 to 2019 in our hospital. Logistic regression (LR), XGboost, Adaboost, Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), and Random Forest (RF) models were determined using F1 score, recall, accuracy, the area under the curve (ROC), calibration plot and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to evaluate the different models. Logistic regression showed better predictive performance and interpretability than machine learning. Gender, recurrence history, T1 signal intensity, enhanced signal degree, peritumoral edema, tumor diameter, cystic, location, and NLR index were identified as independent risk factors and added to the nomogram. The AUC (Area Under Curve) value of RF was 0.812 in the training set, 0.807 in the internal validation set, and 0.842 in the external validation set. The calibration curve and DCA (Decision Curve Analysis) indicated that it had better prediction efficiency of LR than others. The Nomogram preoperative prediction model of meningioma of WHO II and III grades showed effective prediction ability. While machine learning exhibits strong fitting ability, it performs poorly in the validation set.

Indexed as

high-grade meningiomalogistic regressionmachine learningnomogram

Identifiers

PMID37190559
PMCPMC10136416
OpenAlexW4362471922

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.