Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39918034›Full record

ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025

Comparison of Predictive Models for Keloid Recurrence Based on Machine Learning.

Yan Hao, Mengjie Shan, Hao Liu, Yijun Xia, Xinwen Kuang, Kexin Song, Youbin Wang

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

7 authors.

Yan HaoDepartment of Plastic and Cosmetic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Mengjie ShanDepartment of Plastic and Cosmetic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Hao LiuDepartment of Plastic and Cosmetic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yijun XiaDepartment of Plastic and Cosmetic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xinwen KuangPeking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Kexin SongDepartment of Plastic and Cosmetic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Youbin WangDepartment of Plastic and Cosmetic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3257-1583

Funding

Beijing Municipal Commission of Science and Technology Z191100006619009the Clinical Research Special Fund of Peking Union Medical College Hospital LY22B0400004653
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo establish, evaluate and compare three recurrence prediction models for keloid patients using machine learning methods.

methodsWe enrolled 301 keloid patients who underwent surgery and postoperative radiotherapy, dividing them into a training set (70%) and a validation set (30%). Three recurrence prediction models were established in the training set: the logistic regression model, the decision tree model, and the random forest model. We then evaluated and compared the performance of these models in the validation set, using metrics such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, recall, precision, kappa coefficient, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC).

resultsWe developed three machine learning-based prediction models for keloid recurrence. KAAS, mean arterial pressure levels, postoperative complications, and the proportion of inflammatory cells played crucial roles in these models. The decision tree model outperformed both the random forest and logistic regression models in terms of accuracy, and it also exhibited the highest overall precision. Regarding AUC, logistic regression performed the best, followed by random forest and decision trees.

conclusionsThis study established three prediction models for keloid recurrence using machine learning techniques, highlighting the significance of KAAS, blood pressure levels, postoperative complications, and inflammatory cell proportions. When compared from various dimensions, the logistic regression model demonstrated the most favorable prognostic performance in terms of AUC.

Indexed as

Decision TreesKeloidPostoperative ComplicationsPredictive Learning ModelsRecurrenceAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisROC Curvekeloidmachine learningprediction modelrecurrencerisk factors

Identifiers

PMID39918034
PMCPMC11803684

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.