ArticleHeliyon2024
An enhanced and efficient approach for feature selection for chronic human disease prediction: A breast cancer study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostics of diabetic retinopathy based on fundus photos using machine learning methods with advanced feature engineering algorithms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Radiomics early assessment of post chemotherapy cardiotoxicity in cancer patients using 2D echocardiography imaging an interpretable machine learning study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Utilizing Feature Selection Techniques for AI-Driven Tumor Subtype Classification: Enhancing Precision in Cancer Diagnostics.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Ensemble-based multiclass lung cancer classification using hybrid CNN-SVD feature extraction and selection method.PloS one · 2025Article
- Assessing ML classification algorithms and NLP techniques for depression detection: An experimental case study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Algorithm, expert, or both? Evaluating the role of feature selection methods on user preferences and reliance.PloS one · 2025Article
- A machine learning approach to determine the risk factors for fall in multiple sclerosis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems play a vital role in modern research by effectively minimizing both time and costs. These systems support healthcare professionals like radiologists in their decision-making process by efficiently detecting abnormalities as well as offering accurate and dependable information. These systems heavily depend on the efficient selection of features to accurately categorize high-dimensional biological data. These features can subsequently assist in the diagnosis of related medical conditions. The task of identifying patterns in biomedical data can be quite challenging due to the presence of numerous irrelevant or redundant features. Therefore, it is crucial to propose and then utilize a feature selection (FS) process in order to eliminate these features. The primary goal of FS approaches is to improve the accuracy of classification by eliminating features that are irrelevant or less informative. The FS phase plays a critical role in attaining optimal results in machine learning (ML)-driven CAD systems. The effectiveness of ML models can be significantly enhanced by incorporating efficient features during the training phase. This empirical study presents a methodology for the classification of biomedical data using the FS technique. The proposed approach incorporates three soft computing-based optimization algorithms, namely Teaching Learning-Based Optimization (TLBO), Elephant Herding Optimization (EHO), and a proposed hybrid algorithm of these two. These algorithms were previously employed; however, their effectiveness in addressing FS issues in predicting human diseases has not been investigated. The following evaluation focuses on the categorization of benign and malignant tumours using the publicly available Wisconsin Diagnostic Breast Cancer (WDBC) benchmark dataset. The five-fold cross-validation technique is employed to mitigate the risk of over-fitting. The evaluation of the proposed approach's proficiency is determined based on several metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, precision, accuracy, area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), and F1-score. The best value of accuracy computed through the suggested approach is 97.96%. The proposed clinical decision support system demonstrates a highly favourable classification performance outcome, making it a valuable tool for medical practitioners to utilize as a secondary opinion and reducing the overburden of expert medical practitioners.
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.