Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37307043›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

Personalized Risk Analysis to Improve the Psychological Resilience of Women Undergoing Treatment for Breast Cancer: Development of a Machine Learning-Driven Clinical Decision Support Tool.

Georgios C Manikis, Nicholas J Simos, Konstantina Kourou, Haridimos Kondylakis, Paula Poikonen-Saksela, Ketti Mazzocco, Ruth Pat-Horenczyk, Berta Sousa, Albino J Oliveira-Maia, Johanna Mattson and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

16 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.

Georgios C Manikis *Foundation for Research and Technology-Hellas, Institute of Computer Science, Heraklion, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-3396-0644
Nicholas J Simos *Foundation for Research and Technology-Hellas, Institute of Computer Science, Heraklion, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-2459-7572
Konstantina KourouDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-4310-2739
Haridimos KondylakisFoundation for Research and Technology-Hellas, Institute of Computer Science, Heraklion, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-9917-4486
Paula Poikonen-SakselaComprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-2274-1937
Ketti MazzoccoApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1382-6779
Ruth Pat-HorenczykSchool of Social Work and Social Welfare,The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-5589-8837
Berta SousaBreast Unit, Champalimaud Research and Clinical Centre, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-2287-4799
Albino J Oliveira-MaiaChampalimaud Research and Clinical Centre, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-5071-3007
Johanna MattsonComprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-9719-9110
Ilan RozinerDepartment of Communication Disorders, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID 0000-0003-1282-4368
Chiara MarzoratiApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7761-2804
Kostas MariasFoundation for Research and Technology-Hellas, Institute of Computer Science, Heraklion, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-3783-5223
Mikko NuutinenNordic Healthcare Group, Helsinkifin, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-7429-3710
Evangelos KarademasFoundation for Research and Technology-Hellas, Institute of Computer Science, Heraklion, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-0802-5213
Dimitrios FotiadisDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-7362-5082
Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas · GRChampalimaud Foundation · PTUniversity of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Ioannina · GREuropean Institute of Oncology · ITHebrew University of Jerusalem · ILTel Aviv University · ILUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth professionals are often faced with the need to identify women at risk of manifesting poor psychological resilience following the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Machine learning algorithms are increasingly used to support clinical decision support (CDS) tools in helping health professionals identify women who are at risk of adverse well-being outcomes and plan customized psychological interventions for women at risk. Clinical flexibility, cross-validated performance accuracy, and model explainability permitting person-specific identification of risk factors are highly desirable features of such tools.

objectiveThis study aimed to develop and cross-validate machine learning models designed to identify breast cancer survivors at risk of poor overall mental health and global quality of life and identify potential targets of personalized psychological interventions according to an extensive set of clinical recommendations.

methodsA set of 12 alternative models was developed to improve the clinical flexibility of the CDS tool. All models were validated using longitudinal data from a prospective, multicenter clinical pilot at 5 major oncology centers in 4 countries (Italy, Finland, Israel, and Portugal; the Predicting Effective Adaptation to Breast Cancer to Help Women to BOUNCE Back [BOUNCE] project). A total of 706 patients with highly treatable breast cancer were enrolled shortly after diagnosis and before the onset of oncological treatments and were followed up for 18 months. An extensive set of demographic, lifestyle, clinical, psychological, and biological variables measured within 3 months after enrollment served as predictors. Rigorous feature selection isolated key psychological resilience outcomes that could be incorporated into future clinical practice.

resultsBalanced random forest classifiers were successful at predicting well-being outcomes, with accuracies ranging between 78% and 82% (for 12-month end points after diagnosis) and between 74% and 83% (for 18-month end points after diagnosis). Explainability and interpretability analyses built on the best-performing models were used to identify potentially modifiable psychological and lifestyle characteristics that, if addressed systematically in the context of personalized psychological interventions, would be most likely to promote resilience for a given patient.

conclusionsOur results highlight the clinical utility of the BOUNCE modeling approach by focusing on resilience predictors that can be readily available to practicing clinicians at major oncology centers. The BOUNCE CDS tool paves the way for personalized risk assessment methods to identify patients at high risk of adverse well-being outcomes and direct valuable resources toward those most in need of specialized psychological interventions.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsDecision Support Systems, ClinicalResilience, PsychologicalFemaleHumansMachine LearningProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRisk Assessmentbreast cancerclassificationexplainabilityinterventionsmachine learningmental healthrisk assessmentwell-being

Identifiers

PMID37307043
PMCPMC10337304
OpenAlexW4380290525

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.