ArticleScientific reports2024
A data-centric machine learning approach to improve prediction of glioma grades using low-imbalance TCGA data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing clinical insights in glioma grading using Bayesian Optimization and Explainable AI.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Addressing the balance between fairness and performance in glioma grade prediction using bias mitigation techniques.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Diagnostic Value of Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging in Preoperative Grading of Glial Tumors.Cureus · 2025Article
- Hybrid classical and quantum computing for enhanced glioma tumor classification using TCGA data.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Hybrid clustering strategies for effective oversampling and undersampling in multiclass classification.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cancer genomics and bioinformatics in Latin American countries: applications, challenges, and perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate prediction and grading of gliomas play a crucial role in evaluating brain tumor progression, assessing overall prognosis, and treatment planning. In addition to neuroimaging techniques, identifying molecular biomarkers that can guide the diagnosis, prognosis and prediction of the response to therapy has aroused the interest of researchers in their use together with machine learning and deep learning models. Most of the research in this field has been model-centric, meaning it has been based on finding better performing algorithms. However, in practice, improving data quality can result in a better model. This study investigates a data-centric machine learning approach to determine their potential benefits in predicting glioma grades. We report six performance metrics to provide a complete picture of model performance. Experimental results indicate that standardization and oversizing the minority class increase the prediction performance of four popular machine learning models and two classifier ensembles applied on a low-imbalanced data set consisting of clinical factors and molecular biomarkers. The experiments also show that the two classifier ensembles significantly outperform three of the four standard prediction models. Furthermore, we conduct a comprehensive descriptive analysis of the glioma data set to identify relevant statistical characteristics and discover the most informative attributes using four feature ranking algorithms.
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.