ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2025
Auxiliary Diagnosis of Pulmonary Nodules' Benignancy and Malignancy Based on Machine Learning: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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.
- Improving risk stratification of pulmonary nodules: an integrated perinodular vascular and radiomic model for clinical decision support.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- The intersection of artificial intelligence and lung nodule research: current applications and future prospects.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lung cancer, one of the most lethal malignancies globally, often presents insidiously as pulmonary nodules. Its nonspecific clinical presentation and heterogeneous imaging characteristics hinder accurate differentiation between benign and malignant lesions, while biopsy's invasiveness and procedural constraints underscore the critical need for non-invasive early diagnostic approaches. Methods: In this retrospective study, we analyzed outpatient and inpatient records from the First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital between 2011 and 2021, focusing on pulmonary nodules measuring 5-30mm on CT scans without overt signs of malignancy. Pathological examination served as the reference standard. Comparative experiments evaluated SVM, RF, XGBoost, FNN, and Atten_FNN using five-fold cross-validation to assess AUC, sensitivity, and specificity. The dataset was split 70%/30%, and stratified five-fold cross-validation was applied to the training set. The optimal model was interpreted with SHAP to identify the most influential predictive features. Results: This study enrolled 3355 patients, including 1156 with benign and 2199 with malignant pulmonary nodules. The Atten_FNN model demonstrated superior performance in five-fold cross-validation, achieving an AUC of 0.82, accuracy of 0.75, sensitivity of 0.77, and F1 score of 0.80. SHAP analysis revealed key predictive factors: demographic variables (age, sex, BMI), CT-derived features (maximum nodule diameter, morphology, density, calcification, ground-glass opacity), and laboratory biomarkers (neuroendocrine markers, carcinoembryonic antigen). Conclusion: This study integrates electronic medical records and pathology data to predict pulmonary nodule malignancy using machine/deep learning models. SHAP-based interpretability analysis uncovered key clinical determinants. Acknowledging limitations in cross-center generalizability, we propose the development of a multimodal diagnostic systems that combines CT imaging and radiomics, to be validated in multi-center prospective cohorts to facilitate clinical translation. This framework establishes a novel paradigm for early precision diagnosis of lung cancer.
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.