ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Cost-Effective Model for Predicting Recurrent Gastric Cancer Using Clinical Features.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Machine Learning Framework for Prognostic Modeling in Stage III Colon Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study used artificial intelligence techniques to identify clinical cancer biomarkers for recurrent gastric cancer survivors. From a hospital-based cancer registry database in Taiwan, the datasets of the incidence of recurrence and clinical risk features were included in 2476 gastric cancer survivors. We benchmarked Random Forest using MLP, C4.5, AdaBoost, and Bagging algorithms on metrics and leveraged the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) for imbalanced dataset issues, cost-sensitive learning for risk assessment, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAPs) for feature importance analysis in this study. Our proposed Random Forest outperformed the other models with an accuracy of 87.9%, a recall rate of 90.5%, an accuracy rate of 86%, and an F1 of 88.2% on the recurrent category by a 10-fold cross-validation in a balanced dataset. We identified clinical features of recurrent gastric cancer, which are the top five features, stage, number of regional lymph node involvement,
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.