ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2024
Comparison of Machine Learning Models Using Diffusion-Weighted Images for Pathological Grade of Intrahepatic Mass-Forming Cholangiocarcinoma.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multidimensional deep learning for grading and prognostic assessment of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence in abdominal imaging.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Is the radiomic approach, utilizing diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), capable of predicting the various pathological grades of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC)? Furthermore, which model demonstrates superior performance among the diverse algorithms currently available? The objective of our study is to develop DWI radiomic models based on different machine learning algorithms and identify the optimal prediction model. We undertook a retrospective analysis of the DWI data of 77 patients with IMCC confirmed by pathological testing. Fifty-seven patients initially included in the study were randomly assigned to either the training set or the validation set in a ratio of 7:3. We established four different classifier models, namely random forest (RF), support vector machines (SVM), logistic regression (LR), and gradient boosting decision tree (GBDT), by manually contouring the region of interest and extracting prominent radiomic features. An external validation of the model was performed with the DWI data of 20 patients with IMCC who were subsequently included in the study. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), accuracy (ACC), precision (PRE), sensitivity (REC), and F1 score were used to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the model. Following the process of feature selection, a total of nine features were retained, with skewness being the most crucial radiomic feature demonstrating the highest diagnostic performance, followed by Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix lmc1 (glcm-lmc1) and kurtosis, whose diagnostic performances were slightly inferior to skewness. Skewness and kurtosis showed a negative correlation with the pathological grading of IMCC, while glcm-lmc1 exhibited a positive correlation with the IMCC pathological grade. Compared with the other three models, the SVM radiomic model had the best diagnostic performance with an AUC of 0.957, an accuracy of 88.2%, a sensitivity of 85.7%, a precision of 85.7%, and an F1 score of 85.7% in the training set, as well as an AUC of 0.829, an accuracy of 76.5%, a sensitivity of 71.4%, a precision of 71.4%, and an F1 score of 71.4% in the external validation set. The DWI-based radiomic model proved to be efficacious in predicting the pathological grade of IMCC. The model with the SVM classifier algorithm had the best prediction efficiency and robustness. Consequently, this SVM-based model can be further explored as an option for a non-invasive preoperative prediction method in clinical practice.
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.