ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
A machine learning approach to predict self-efficacy in breast cancer survivors.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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.
- Socioeconomic determinants of malaria in Ugandan children: An interpretable machine learning approach for public health policy.PLOS digital health · 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
purposeTo determine predictors of self-efficacy in breast cancer survivors and identify vulnerable groups.
methodsThis descriptive study was conducted between November 2023 and April 2024 at three hospitals in Türkiye and involved 430 breast cancer survivors. Data were collected through face-to-face surveys using a patient identification form and the Breast Cancer Survivor Self-Efficacy Scale. This study identified patient characteristics that indicate a tendency towards higher self-efficacy using four machine learning models; Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), XGBoost (XGB).
resultsThe mean age of participants was 50.7 ± 11.5 years. Majority of the participants (n = 425) were female. AUC values were used as ranker for the machine learning models. The ranks of the models were as follows; logistic regression model (0.715), RF (0.710), SVM (0.704), and XGBoost (0.694). Education level ranked first in the LR (0.3874), RF (0.3290), and SVM (0.1250) models, and was the second most important variable in the XGB (0.2327) model. Conversely, the cancer stage stood out in the LR (0.2466) and RF (0.1935) models, ranking third and fourth, respectively, while it ranked third in SVM (0.0683) and fourth in XGB (0.1872). Additionally, comorbidity ranked third in importance in the LR (0.2213) and RF (0.1681) models, but second in SVM (0.0705) and seventh in XGB (0.1393).
conclusionThe study demonstrated that the self-efficacy of breast cancer survivors was associated with their sociodemographic and medical characteristics. These characteristics may assist healthcare professionals in enhancing the care provided to breast cancer survivors. It is of the utmost importance to consider the aforementioned patient group as being vulnerable with regard to breast cancer survivor self-efficacy. There is a clear need for a focus on this vulnerable cohort.
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.