Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41878629›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2026

Machine Learning-Based Diagnostic Models for Early Gastric Cancer Using Clinical Laboratory Indicators.

Runbi Ji, Ruoyu Yang, Jun Yao, Shenglan Dai, Xin Zhu, Qiang Ye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of general medicine, 2026. 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

6 authors.

Runbi JiThe Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, 212002, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-0948-1563
Ruoyu YangThe Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, 212002, People's Republic of China.
Jun YaoThe Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, 212002, People's Republic of China.
Shenglan DaiThe Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, 212002, People's Republic of China.
Xin ZhuThe Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, 212002, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0001-7351-8239
Qiang YeThe Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, 212002, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The occurrence of gastric cancer is a complex pathological process leading to multiple abnormalities in clinical laboratory indicators. Machine learning techniques can make it easy to handle millions of variables to make more accurate predictions and diagnoses of diseases. Methods: Clinical data from gastric cancer patients in a single-center who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2023 were collected. Five machine learning algorithms (extreme gradient boosting, XGBoost; random forest, RF; support vector machine-recursive feature elimination, SVM-RFE; light gradient boosting machine, LGBM; and recursive partitioning, rpart) were utilized to develop diagnostic models. Among the date, 60% were randomly selected to train the models, while the remaining 40% were used for testing. We used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), F1-score value, sensitivity, and specificity to evaluate the performance of models. Results: The XGBoost algorithm showed the best performance in gastric cancer diagnosis, with significantly higher area under curve (AUC) (combining blood indicators and pathological parameters, AUC=0.9909) value than other models. Glutathione reductase (GR), carbohydrate antigen 724 (CA724), erythrocytes (RBC), carbohydrate antigen 242 (CA242), and albumin (ALB) contributed the most to the diagnosis. The tumor size were independent risk factors for early gastric cancer. Conclusion: Machine learning combined blood indicators and pathological parameters could predict gastric cancer risk more accurately. The XGBoost model had the best diagnostic performance. The study provides confirmatory data support for the preclinical implementation of the model.

Indexed as

clinical laboratory indicatorsdiagnostic modelearly gastric cancerglutathione reductasemachine learning

Identifiers

PMID41878629
PMCPMC13006335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.