ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Exploration in association between vitamin D and cutaneous melanoma and explainable machine learning prediction.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Association of serum vitamin D and serum vitamin C with the risk of melanoma among adults in the United States: a cross-sectional analysis of 2003-2006 and 2017-2018 NHANES data.Journal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to examine association between vitamin D with melanoma and develop an explainable machine learning model. Methods: For this study, relevant data were downloaded from the CDC's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) program, for the three survey cycles 2011-2012, 2013-2014 and 2015-2016. Self-reported melanoma data, serum vitamin D levels, and other covariates were downloaded and analyzed. Analysis of variance in this study was performed using t-tests and chi-square tests, modelling was performed using logistic regression based on NHANES weights, and other risk factors were analyzed using forest plots. Ten machine learning models were compared and XGboost was selected for the melanoma prediction. Results: In this study, logistic regression analysis revealed a protective effect of higher vitamin D levels in melanoma, the ORs were much less than 1 for Q2 (OR=0.97, 95% CI (0.44, 0.98)), Q3 (OR=0.71, 95% CI (0.65, 0.92)), and Q4 (OR=0.32, 95% CI (0.55, 0.81)). Meanwhile, forest plot analysis showed that vitamin D, the number of sunburns in the past year, advanced age, Caucasian, education some college, single and unmarried, smoking, diabetes and hypertension, were all statistically significant. The OR was higher in men than in women, with Q4 values of 0.31 (95% CI: 0.18-0.51) for men and 0.29 (95% CI: 0.15-0.45) for women. OR was higher in the senior patients than in the non-senior group, with Q4 (OR=0.53, 95% CI (0.23, 0.73)). An explainable XGBoost model had AUC 0.906, and in the model vitamin D had main contribution to the model. Conclusion: In conclusion, this study concluded that vitamin D decreases melanoma risk based on a larger sample and multi-covariate analysis. Female and young people received high protection from vitamin D in melanoma. XGBoost can accurately prediction the possibility of melanoma based on vitamin D.
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.