ArticleScientific reports2023
Advancing prostate cancer detection: a comparative analysis of PCLDA-SVM and PCLDA-KNN classifiers for enhanced diagnostic accuracy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrative analysis of urinary microRNAs for prostate cancer detection: A proof-of-concept study.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- CT-Based Radiomic Signatures Associated with Serum CEA Status in Colon Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence driven platform for rapid catalytic performance assessment of nanozymes.Scientific reports · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This investigation aimed to assess the effectiveness of different classification models in diagnosing prostate cancer using a screening dataset obtained from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Data Access System. The dataset was first reduced using the PCLDA method, which combines Principal Component Analysis and Linear Discriminant Analysis. Two classifiers, Support Vector Machine (SVM) and k-Nearest Neighbour (KNN), were then applied to compare their performance. The results showed that the PCLDA-SVM model achieved an impressive accuracy rate of 97.99%, with a precision of 0.92, sensitivity of 92.83%, specificity of 97.65%, and F1 score of 0.93. Additionally, it demonstrated a low error rate of 0.016 and a Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) and Kappa coefficient of 0.946. On the other hand, the PCLDA-KNN model also performed well, achieving an accuracy of 97.8%, precision of 0.93, sensitivity of 93.39%, specificity of 97.86%, an F1 score of 0.92, a high MCC and Kappa coefficient of 0.98, and an error rate of 0.006. In conclusion, the PCLDA-SVM method exhibited improved efficacy in diagnosing prostate cancer compared to the PCLDA-KNN model. Both models, however, showed promising results, suggesting the potential of these classifiers in prostate cancer diagnosis.
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.