ArticlePloS one2024
Explainable machine learning approach for cancer prediction through binarilization of RNA sequencing data.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Systematic detection of predictive gene sets by semantics-based selection.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Role of urinary leukocytes in the risk stratification of prostate cancer using nonlinear stacking learning strategy: a bi-cohort diagnostic study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Machine Learning Models for Cancer Research: A Narrative Review of Bulk RNA-Seq Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- EXO1 overexpression induces homologous recombination deficiency and enhances PARP inhibitor sensitivity in ER-positive breast cancer: modulation by N4BP2L2-Mediated restoration.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, researchers have proven the effectiveness and speediness of machine learning-based cancer diagnosis models. However, it is difficult to explain the results generated by machine learning models, especially ones that utilized complex high-dimensional data like RNA sequencing data. In this study, we propose the binarilization technique as a novel way to treat RNA sequencing data and used it to construct explainable cancer prediction models. We tested our proposed data processing technique on five different models, namely neural network, random forest, xgboost, support vector machine, and decision tree, using four cancer datasets collected from the National Cancer Institute Genomic Data Commons. Since our datasets are imbalanced, we evaluated the performance of all models using metrics designed for imbalance performance like geometric mean, Matthews correlation coefficient, F-Measure, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Our approach showed comparative performance while relying on less features. Additionally, we demonstrated that data binarilization offers higher explainability by revealing how each feature affects the prediction. These results demonstrate the potential of data binarilization technique in improving the performance and explainability of RNA sequencing based cancer prediction models.
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.