Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39629021›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2024

A bibliometric review of predictive modelling for cervical cancer risk.

Francis Ngema, Bonginkosi Mdhluli, Pako Mmileng, Precious Shungube, Mokgoropo Makgaba, Twinomurinzi Hossana

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Francis NgemaCentre of Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Bonginkosi MdhluliCentre of Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Pako MmilengCentre of Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Precious ShungubeCentre of Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Mokgoropo MakgabaCentre of Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Twinomurinzi HossanaCentre of Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cervical cancer represents a significant public health challenge, particularly affecting women's health globally. This study aims to advance the understanding of cervical cancer risk prediction research through a bibliometric analysis. The study identified 800 records from Scopus and Web of Science databases, which were reduced to 142 unique records after removing duplicates. Out of 100 abstracts assessed, 42 were excluded based on specific criteria, resulting in 58 studies included in the bibliometric review. Multiple scoping methods such as thematic analysis, citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, natural language processing, Latent Dirichlet Allocation and other visualisation techniques were used to analyse related publications between 2013 and 2024. The key findings revealed the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in cervical cancer risk prediction, integrating expertise from mathematical disciplines, biomedical health, healthcare practitioners, public health, and policy. This approach significantly enhanced the accuracy and efficiency of cervical cancer detection and predictive modelling by adopting advanced machine learning algorithms, such as random forests and support vector machines. The main challenges were the lack of external validation on independent datasets and the need to address model interpretability to ensure healthcare providers understand and trust the predictive models. The study revealed the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in cervical cancer risk prediction. It made recommendations for future research to focus on increasing the external validation of models, improving model interpretability, and promoting global research collaborations to enhance the comprehensiveness and applicability of cervical cancer risk prediction models.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecervical cancerlatent Dirichlet allocationmachine learningnatural language processingpredictive modellingrisk predictionthematic analysis

Identifiers

PMID39629021
PMCPMC11611846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.