ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Machine learning algorithms to uncover risk factors of breast cancer: insights from a large case-control study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Machine Learning for the Analysis of Healthy Lifestyle Data: Scoping Review and Guidelines.JMIR human factors · 2026Guideline
- Machine Learning Techniques Used for the Identification of Sociodemographic Factors Associated With Cancer: Systematic Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- The identification of cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease using biofluids, neuroimaging, and artificial intelligence.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Pooled it
- Development of a risk prediction model for second primary thyroid cancer in female breast cancer patients based on machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- SEER-based machine learning prediction of bone metastasis in breast cancer: model development and validation.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Exploring the role of breastfeeding, antibiotics, and indoor environments in preschool children atopic dermatitis through machine learning and hygiene hypothesis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- A Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Utilization of Artificial Intelligence Within the Healthcare Systems of the Middle East: A Thematic Analysis of Findings.Health science reports · 2024Review
- Prediction of outpatient rehabilitation patient preferences and optimization of graded diagnosis and treatment based on XGBoost machine learning algorithm.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This large case-control study explored the application of machine learning models to identify risk factors for primary invasive incident breast cancer (BC) in the Iranian population. This study serves as a bridge toward improved BC prevention, early detection, and management through the identification of modifiable and unmodifiable risk factors. Methods: The dataset includes 1,009 cases and 1,009 controls, with comprehensive data on lifestyle, health-behavior, reproductive and sociodemographic factors. Different machine learning models, namely Random Forest (RF), Neural Networks (NN), Bootstrap Aggregating Classification and Regression Trees (Bagged CART), and Extreme Gradient Boosting Tree (XGBoost), were employed to analyze the data. Results: The findings highlight the significance of a chest X-ray history, deliberate weight loss, abortion history, and post-menopausal status as predictors. Factors such as second-hand smoking, lower education, menarche age (>14), occupation (employed), first delivery age (18-23), and breastfeeding duration (>42 months) were also identified as important predictors in multiple models. The RF model exhibited the highest Area Under the Curve (AUC) value of 0.9, as indicated by the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. Following closely was the Bagged CART model with an AUC of 0.89, while the XGBoost model achieved a slightly lower AUC of 0.78. In contrast, the NN model demonstrated the lowest AUC of 0.74. On the other hand, the RF model achieved an accuracy of 83.9% and a Kappa coefficient of 67.8% and the XGBoost, achieved a lower accuracy of 82.5% and a lower Kappa coefficient of 0.6. Conclusion: This study could be beneficial for targeted preventive measures according to the main risk factors for BC among high-risk women.
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.