ArticleHeliyon2024
Clinical decision support tool for breast cancer recurrence prediction using SHAP value in cooperative game theory.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting COVID-19 Mortality Risk Among Cardiovascular Disease Patients Using Artificial Intelligence Algorithms: A Retrospective Study on Clinical Data.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Multi-omics and machine learning reveal DPPC as a key contributor to colorectal cancer progression and tumor immune microenvironment remodeling.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Integrating CT radiomics and transcriptomics: a biologically-informed machine learning model for predicting chemotherapy response in advanced laryngeal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- A deep learning-clinical combined model with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method for assessing the tumor spread through air spaces in lung adenocarcinoma: a multicohort retrospective study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence for Infectious Disease Surveillance, Diagnosis, and Prognosis.Viruses · 2025Review
- Machine learning prediction of breast cancer local recurrence localization, and distant metastasis after local recurrences.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Explainable machine learning for stroke risk prediction: a comparative study with SHAP-based interpretation.Frontiers in neurology · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recurrence remains the primary cause of death in patients with breast cancer. Although machine learning can efficiently predict the prognosis of breast cancer patients, the black-box nature of the model may result in a lack of evidence for clinicians when making critical decisions. Methods: In this study, our main objective was twofold: (1) to develop a clinical decision support tool for predicting the prognosis of breast cancer and (2) to identify and explore the key factors that influence breast cancer recurrence. To achieve this, we employed an explainable ensemble learning method called Shapley additive explanation (SHAP), which leverages cooperative game theory. Using real-world data from 1629 breast cancer patients, we analyzed and uncovered the key factors associated with breast cancer recurrence. Subsequently, we used these identified factors to create a recurrence prediction model and establish a decision mechanism for the tool. The proposed method not only provides accurate recurrence predictions but also offers transparent explanations for these predictions. Results: By utilizing four key factors, namely, tumor size, clinical stage III, number of lymph node metastases, and age, our decision support tool for predicting breast cancer recurrence achieved significant improvements. The extra-tree model exhibited an increased area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.97, while the Random Forest model demonstrated an improved AUC of 0.96. We also offer a decision mechanism for a recurrence prediction model based on the identified key factors. This transparent and interpretable decision-making process facilitated by our explainable ensemble learning model enhances trust and promotes its applicability in clinical settings. Conclusions: The proposed explainable ensemble learning method shows promising results in predicting breast cancer recurrence, outperforming existing methods with high accuracy and transparency. This advancement has the potential to significantly improve clinical decision-making and patient outcomes in breast cancer treatment.
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.