ArticleScientific reports2025
A comparative study on advanced predictive modeling of thyroid cancer recurrence using multi algorithmic machine learning frameworks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prediction models for postoperative recurrence in papillary thyroid carcinoma: a systematic review and critical appraisal.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thyroid cancer recurrence poses a significant challenge in clinical practice, often complicating treatment outcomes and long-term patient management. This study investigates the application of multiple machine learning models-Logistic Regression, Decision Trees, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, Support Vector Machines (SVM), and K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN)-to predict recurrence using a real-world dataset of 383 patients. Among the evaluated models, the Random Forest classifier achieved the highest accuracy of 98.26%, demonstrating a strong balance between sensitivity and specificity. To mitigate class imbalance, class weights were incorporated into the model training. Model performance was assessed through Stratified 5-Fold Cross-Validation. For robust hyperparameter tuning and a reliable performance estimate, we implemented nested cross-validation with GridSearchCV. Analysis of learning curves provided insights into the model's behavior with varying training data sizes. Furthermore, we assessed and improved the reliability of the model's predicted probabilities through model calibration using reliability curves and Isotonic Regression, which is crucial for clinical decision-making. The model demonstrated promising performance (mean nested CV accuracy: ~0.964), and the calibration significantly improved the trustworthiness of probability estimates. Comprehensive preprocessing and feature selection methods, including Chi-square and Random Forest Gini Importance, were applied to enhance model performance. Further explainability was added using SHAP analysis to understand key feature contributions. The findings underscore the potential of machine learning-based frameworks to support early identification of high-risk recurrence cases, thereby assisting clinicians in tailoring follow-up and treatment strategies more effectively.
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.