Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38348453›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2024

Strengths and limitations of non-disclosive data analysis: a comparison of breast cancer survival classifiers using VisualSHIELD.

Danilo Tomasoni, Rosario Lombardo, Mario Lauria

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Danilo TomasoniFondazione the Microsoft Research-University of Trento Centre for Computational and Systems Biology (COSBI), Rovereto, Italy.
Rosario LombardoDepartment of Economics, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Mario LauriaFondazione the Microsoft Research-University of Trento Centre for Computational and Systems Biology (COSBI), Rovereto, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preserving data privacy is an important concern in the research use of patient data. The DataSHIELD suite enables privacy-aware advanced statistical analysis in a federated setting. Despite its many applications, it has a few open practical issues: the complexity of hosting a federated infrastructure, the performance penalty imposed by the privacy-preserving constraints, and the ease of use by non-technical users. In this work, we describe a case study in which we review different breast cancer classifiers and report our findings about the limits and advantages of such non-disclosive suite of tools in a realistic setting. Five independent gene expression datasets of breast cancer survival were downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) and pooled together through the federated infrastructure. Three previously published and two newly proposed 5-year cancer-free survival risk score classifiers were trained in a federated environment, and an additional reference classifier was trained with unconstrained data access. The performance of these six classifiers was systematically evaluated, and the results show that i) the published classifiers do not generalize well when applied to patient cohorts that differ from those used to develop them; ii) among the methods we tried, the classification using logistic regression worked better on average, closely followed by random forest; iii) the unconstrained version of the logistic regression classifier outperformed the federated version by 4

Indexed as

computational biologyfederated databasesnon-disclosive data analysistranscriptional signaturestranscriptomic data

Identifiers

PMID38348453
PMCPMC10859452

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.