ArticleScientific reports2023
Development of predictive models for lymphedema by using blood tests and therapy data.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A dermal backflow atlas of lymphatic dysfunction in breast cancer-related lymphedema with machine learning-based stage prediction.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Prediction of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: A Systematic Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- "Debulking" the future of lymphedema surgery: A narrative review.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- AI-Empowered Mechanomedicine for Cancer-Related Lymphedema.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- Noncontrast MRI-based machine learning and radiomics signature can predict the severity of primary lower limb lymphedema.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lymphedema is a disease that refers to tissue swelling caused by an accumulation of protein-rich fluid that is usually drained through the lymphatic system. Detection of lymphedema is often based on expensive diagnoses such as bioimpedance spectroscopy, shear wave elastography, computed tomography, etc. In current machine learning models for lymphedema prediction, reliance on observable symptoms reported by patients introduces the possibility of errors in patient-input data. Moreover, these symptoms are often absent during the initial stages of lymphedema, creating challenges in its early detection. Identifying lymphedema before these observable symptoms manifest would greatly benefit patients by potentially minimizing the discomfort caused by these symptoms. In this study, we propose to use new data, such as complete blood count, serum, and therapy data, to develop predictive models for lymphedema. This approach aims to compensate for the limitations of using only observable symptoms data. We collected data from 2137 patients, including 356 patients with lymphedema and 1781 patients without lymphedema, with the lymphedema status of each patient confirmed by clinicians. The data for each patient included: (1) a complete blood count (CBC) test, (2) a serum test, and (3) therapy information. We used various machine learning algorithms (i.e. random forest, gradient boosting, decision tree, logistic regression, and artificial neural network) to develop predictive models on the training dataset (i.e. 80% of the data) and evaluated the models on the external validation dataset (i.e. 20% of the data). After selecting the best predictive models, we created a web application to aid medical doctors and clinicians in the rapid screening of lymphedema patients. A dataset of 2137 patients was assembled from Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Predictive models based on the random forest algorithm exhibited satisfactory performance (balanced accuracy = 87.0 ± 0.7%, sensitivity = 84.3 ± 0.6%, specificity = 89.1 ± 1.5%, precision = 97.4 ± 0.7%, F1 score = 90.4 ± 0.4%, and AUC = 0.931 ± 0.007). We developed a web application to facilitate the swift screening of lymphedema among medical practitioners: https://snubhtxt.shinyapps.io/SNUBH_Lymphedema . Our study introduces a novel tool for the early detection of lymphedema and establishes the foundation for future investigations into predicting different stages of the condition.
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.