ArticleActa dermato-venereologica2026
Predicting Melanoma Impact on the Swedish Healthcare System from the Adult Population Using Machine Learning on Registry Data.
Article in Acta dermato-venereologica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Melanoma incidence has increased in Western countries over the past 50 years, leading to significant healthcare costs. In Sweden, comprehensive healthcare registries enable large-scale prediction studies using machine learning. Several machine learning models were evaluated to predict melanoma diagnoses using Swedish registry data, assessing the added value of diagnostic and medication data beyond demographics. The study included all adults in Sweden with continuous residency for 9.5 years (n = 6,036,186). The outcome was a melanoma diagnosis, including melanoma in situ, recorded within 5 years after the index date (31 December 2014). Predictors included age, sex, income, education, marital status, region of birth, diagnoses, and dispensed drugs. Models tested were logistic regression, gradient boosting, random forests, and a neural network. A total of 38,582 individuals (0.64%) developed melanoma. The gradient boosting model using all predictors performed best, with an area under the receiving operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.735 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.725-0.746). When diagnosis and medication data were excluded, AUC dropped to 0.681 (95% CI: 0.670-0.691). The findings highlight that including healthcare codes improves predictive performance, and demonstrate the utility of Swedish registries for computational phenotyping. This approach may support early detection of melanoma and targeted follow-up.
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.