Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40368385›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2025

Evaluating the sample size requirements of tree-based ensemble machine learning techniques for clinical risk prediction.

Oya Kalaycıoğlu, Menelaos Pavlou, Serhat E Akhanlı, Mark A de Belder, Gareth Ambler, Rumana Z Omar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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

6 authors.

Oya KalaycıoğluDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-2183-7080
Menelaos PavlouDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1161-1440
Serhat E AkhanlıDepartment of Statistics, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0001-7173-3277
Mark A de BelderNational Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, NHS Arden and Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit, Leicester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2690-8319
Gareth AmblerDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5322-7327
Rumana Z OmarDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1483-1932

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning techniques (MLTs) are increasingly being used to develop clinical risk prediction models for binary health outcomes but the sample size requirements for developing and validating such models remain unclear. This study investigates whether sample size guidelines that target mean absolute prediction error (MAPE) for logistic regression models can be applied to tree-based ensemble MLTs (bagging, random forests, and boosting). Simulations based on two large cardiovascular datasets were used to evaluate the performance of MLTs in terms of MAPE, calibration, the

Indexed as

Machine LearningComputer SimulationHumansLogistic ModelsRisk AssessmentSample SizebaggingboostingMachine learningprediction modelrandom forestssample size

Identifiers

PMID40368385
PMCPMC12308042

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.