ArticleCancers2025
Reducing Bias in the Evaluation of Robotic Surgery for Lung Cancer Through Machine Learning.
Article in Cancers, 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.
- Artificial intelligence in thoracic surgery: a narrative review of clinical advances and applications in 2025.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted surgery (RAS) is a major innovation in the treatment of lung cancer, offering advantages in surgical precision and reducing postoperative complications. However, its impact on 90-day mortality remains controversial due to methodological biases in comparative studies. This study uses machine learning methods to improve propensity score estimation and reduce selection bias.
methodsWe used the French national hospital database (PMSI) to identify patients who underwent lung resection for cancer between 2019 and 2023. Four models were applied for propensity score estimation: logistic regression, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), and XGBoost. Group balancing was achieved through propensity score weighting and matching, followed by logistic regression analysis to estimate the effect of RAS on 90-day mortality.
resultsAmong the 30,988 patients included, 5717 (18.5%) underwent robot-assisted surgery, while 25,271 (81.5%) underwent thoracotomy. RAS patients had a lower prevalence of comorbidities and earlier-stage tumors. XGBoost was the most effective model for propensity score estimation, with an AUC ROC of 0.9984 and a Brier Score of 0.0119. The adjusted analysis showed a significant reduction in 90-day mortality in the RAS group (OR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.34-0.45) with weighting and (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.48-0.70) with matching.
conclusionsThe application of machine learning to adjust for selection bias allowed for better control of confounding factors in the analysis of the effect of RAS on 90-day mortality. Our results suggest a potential benefit of robotic surgery compared to thoracotomy, although further studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.