Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40103563›Full record

SynthesisCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2025

Comparing the Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Models in Predicting Ovarian Cancer Survival: A Systematic Review.

Farkhondeh Asadi, Milad Rahimi, Nahid Ramezanghorbani, Sohrab Almasi

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

4 authors.

Farkhondeh AsadiDepartment of Health Information Technology and Management, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-0939-7983
Milad RahimiDepartment of Health Information Technology and Management, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-2750-3826
Nahid RamezanghorbaniDepartment of Development & Coordination Scientific Information and Publications, Deputy of Research & Technology, Ministry of Health & Medical Education, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-4669-7483
Sohrab AlmasiDepartment of Health Information Technology and Management, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-0707-8399

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review investigates the use of machine learning (ML) algorithms in predicting survival outcomes for ovarian cancer (OC) patients. Key prognostic endpoints, including overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment response prediction (TRP), are examined to evaluate the effectiveness of these algorithms and identify significant features that influence predictive accuracy. RECENT

findingsA thorough search of four major databases-PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane-resulted in 2400 articles published within the last decade, with 32 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Notably, most publications emerged after 2021. Commonly used algorithms for survival prediction included random forest, support vector machines, logistic regression, XGBoost, and various deep learning models. Evaluation metrics such as area under the curve (AUC) (18 studies), concordance index (C-index) (11 studies), and accuracy (11 studies) were frequently employed. Age at diagnosis, tumor stage, CA-125 levels, and treatment-related factors were consistently highlighted as significant predictors, emphasizing their relevance in OC prognosis.

conclusionML models demonstrate considerable potential for predicting OC survival outcomes; however, challenges persist regarding model accuracy and interpretability. Incorporating diverse data types-such as clinical, imaging, and molecular datasets-holds promise for enhancing predictive capabilities. Future advancements will depend on integrating heterogeneous data sources with multimodal ML approaches, which are crucial for improving prognostic precision in OC.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMachine LearningOvarian NeoplasmsFemaleHumansPrognosisartificial intelligencecancermachine learningovarysurvival

Identifiers

PMID40103563
PMCPMC11920737

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.