ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2025
TC check: a web app for thyroid cancer recurrence prediction using explainable machine learning.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical 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.
- From explainability to clinical actionability: translating artificial intelligence models into decision support for endocrine disease management.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThyroid cancer (TC) is one of the most prevalent endocrine malignancies, and its recurrence presents a major clinical challenge that can adversely affect patient prognosis and treatment outcomes. Despite the progress in diagnostic methods, traditional statistical models still face limitations in accurately predicting TC recurrence due to the intricate interactions between clinical and pathological factors.
methodsTo address this challenge, the study presented a novel stacking ensemble learning framework for TC recurrence prediction. The dataset included a total of 383 patients, comprising 108 recurrence and 275 non-recurrence cases, and was stratified into training set (n = 268) and testing set (n = 115) using a 70:30 ratio. The proposed stacking framework integrated three heterogeneous base learners, namely Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD), Extra Trees (ET), and Decision Trees (DT) with eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) as the meta learner. The hyperparameter optimization of various learners was performed through 5-fold cross-validation on the training set. The model performance was evaluated on testing set using accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, AUC, and Brier score (BS). To enhance the model's interpretability, the Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) method was utilized to identify the overall top influential factor and provide local interpretation for specific individual patient based model outcome.
resultsThe proposed stacking model achieved accuracy of 96.52%, precision of 96.67%, recall of 90.62%, and F1-Score of 93.55%, AUC of 0.9921 on the testing set. The SHAP analysis revealed the top 5 critical factors to TC recurrence, including treatment response, age, N-stage, risk stratification, and adenopathy. Furthermore, an interactive and user-friendly prediction tool, TCCheck, was developed based on optimized stacking model, accessible online at https://tccheck-prediction-tool.streamlit.app/ .
conclusionThe study presented an effective and interpretable stacking ensemble learning framework for predicting TC recurrence. By deploying the proposed framework as a web prediction tool, it enables explainable and individualized clinical decision support, thereby enhancing its translational value in real-world settings. Furthermore, the framework serves as a methodological reference for recurrence prediction in other cancer types.
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.