Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41390721›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

Assessment of transformer-based AI in clinical oncology.

Lim Weng Seong, Pietro Lio, Nur Aishah Taib, Mogana Darshini Ganggayah, Sarinder Kaur Dhillon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Lim Weng SeongData Science & Bioinformatics Laboratory, Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Pietro LioDepartment of Computer Science and Technology, University of Cambridge, 15 JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 0FD, England.
Nur Aishah TaibDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Mogana Darshini GanggayahDepartment of Econometrics and Business Statistics, School of Business, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Bandar Sunway, Subang Jaya, Selangor, 47500, Malaysia.
Sarinder Kaur DhillonData Science & Bioinformatics Laboratory, Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia. sarinder@um.edu.my.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer survival prediction plays a significant role in better understanding the relationship between clinical features and demographic features to improve decision-making among clinicians. This is done with the help of machine learning models, which assist clinicians in making decisions for the improvement of patients. However, there has been an over-saturation of machine learning models in breast cancer survival prediction, of which the only distinction is the difference in data sampling used and better tuning parameters. This study explores the possibilities of a recent deep learning model called Transformers as a breast cancer survival prediction model. The breast cancer dataset used for the study ranges from 2006 until 2015. The dataset was retrieved from the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The dataset contains 26 variables comprising 24 categorical variables and two numerical variables. A comparison of performance matrices on Transformer models such as BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers), RoBERTa (Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach) and ALBERT (A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representations) to existing machine learning models such as random forest (RF), decision tree (DT), support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression (LR), k-nearest neighbours (KNN), artificial neural network (ANN) and extreme gradient boosting (XGB) was conducted. In terms of overall performance, the Transformer models produced scores that were close to those of other machine learning models. The best accuracy among the Transformer models was the ALBERT model at (81.1%) while the best accuracy among the machine learning models was the LR model at (83.4%). Based on the Transformer models’ close outcomes compared to machine learning models, Transformers can be introduced as an alternative prediction model in breast cancer survival studies. Clinical Trial Number: Not Applicable

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsDeep LearningMedical OncologyFemaleHumansPredictive Learning ModelsBreast cancerDeep learningMachine learningTransformers

Identifiers

PMID41390721
PMCPMC12821829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.