ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
Machine-learning-model based tool for screening bone metastases from lung cancer patients in primary care practice.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to use the machine-learning methods to predict bone metastasis (BM) in patients with lung cancer.
methodsThis study included 8,612 patients with lung cancer, from whom we collected baseline characteristics and hematological data. BM was diagnosed based on imaging results. We normalized metric data using Z-scores and divided the patients into training and validation sets in a 7:3 ratio. After under-sampling of the training set to relieve the interlocking imbalance, the key variables were then selected using the LASSO method. Nine distinct machine-learning models were developed on the training set, and their performance was evaluated on the validation set. Finally, we created an online tool to support real-time analysis of BM in lung cancer patients.
resultsAmong 8,612 lung cancer patients, 947 (11%) were diagnosed with BM. Nine key indicators associated with BM were identified, including ALP, LYM%, HCT, FBG, TT, TBIL, smoking status, DBIL, and D-dimer. Among the evaluated models, the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model showed consistently strong performance, achieving AUCs of 0.8423 and 0.7871; accuracies of 0.7655 and 0.7309; balanced accuracies of 0.76645 and 0.72385; specificities of 0.7652 and 0.7329; and sensitivities of 0.7677 and 0.7148 in the training and validation sets, respectively, along with higher Youden index and F1 score. Consequently, we identified XGBOOST as the optimal predictive model and developed an online platform based on this model to facilitate prediction of BM in lung cancer patients.
conclusionA machine learning model was developed to diagnose BM in lung cancer based on hematological indicators, along with a real-time website. This tool cloud guide further diagnostic evaluations and intervention for high-risk patients.
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.