Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38347611›Full record

ArticleBiomedical engineering online2024

Screening ovarian cancer by using risk factors: machine learning assists.

Raoof Nopour

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

1 author.

Raoof NopourDepartment of Health Information Management, Student Research Committee, School of Health Management and Information Sciences Branch, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. raoof.n1370@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3770-2375

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimOvarian cancer (OC) is a prevalent and aggressive malignancy that poses a significant public health challenge. The lack of preventive strategies for OC increases morbidity, mortality, and other negative consequences. Screening OC through risk prediction could be leveraged as a powerful strategy for preventive purposes that have not received much attention. So, this study aimed to leverage machine learning approaches as predictive assistance solutions to screen high-risk groups of OC and achieve practical preventive purposes. MATERIALS AND

methodsAs this study is data-driven and retrospective in nature, we leveraged 1516 suspicious OC women data from one concentrated database belonging to six clinical settings in Sari City from 2015 to 2019. Six machine learning (ML) algorithms, including XG-Boost, Random Forest (RF), J-48, support vector machine (SVM), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), and artificial neural network (ANN) were leveraged to construct prediction models for OC. To choose the best model for predicting OC, we compared various prediction models built using the area under the receiver characteristic operator curve (AU-ROC).

resultsCurrent experimental results revealed that the XG-Boost with AU-ROC = 0.93 (0.95 CI = [0.91-0.95]) was recognized as the best-performing model for predicting OC.

conclusionsML approaches possess significant predictive efficiency and interoperability to achieve powerful preventive strategies leveraging OC screening high-risk groups.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerOvarian NeoplasmsAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMachine LearningRetrospective StudiesMachine learningOvarian cancerPredictive efficiencyPreventive strategyPublic health challenge

Identifiers

PMID38347611
PMCPMC10863117

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.