ArticleBMC cancer2025
A risk prediction model for gastric cancer based on endoscopic atrophy classification.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An interpretable machine learning model integrating [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Establishment and validation of a prognostic model based on liquid-liquid phase separation-related genes in gastric cancer.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundsGastric cancer (GC) is a prevalent malignancy affecting the digestive system. We aimed to develop a risk prediction model based on endoscopic atrophy classification for GC.
methodsWe retrospectively collected the data from January 2020 to October 2021 in our hospital and randomly divided the patients into training and validation sets in an 8:2 ratio. We used multiple machine learning algorithms such as logistic regression (LR), Decision tree, Support Vector Machine, Random forest, and so on to establish the models. We employed the Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) to screen variables for the LR model. However, we chose all the variables to construct the models for other machine learning algorithms. All models were evaluated using the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), predictive histograms, and decision curve analysis (DCA).
resultsA total of 1156 patients were selected for the analysis. Five variables, including age, sex, family history of GC, HP infection status, and Kimura-Takemoto Classification (KTC), were screened using LASSO analysis. The area under the curve (AUC) of all the machine learning models ranged from 0.762 to 0.974 in the training set and from 0.608 to 0.812 in the validation set. Among them, the LR model exhibited the highest AUC value (0.812, 95%CI: 0.737-0.887) in the validation set with good calibration and clinical applicability. Finally, we constructed a nomogram to demonstrate the LR model.
conclusionsWe established a nomogram based on endoscopic atrophy classification for GC, which might be valuable in predicting GC risk and assisting clinical decision-making.
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.