ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Development and external validation of a machine-learning risk model for colorectal cancer triage in Sweden's fast-track pathway.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFast-track colonoscopy pathways detect colorectal cancer (CRC) but strain endoscopy capacity. We developed and externally validated multivariable risk models combining faecal immunochemical test (FIT) with clinical data to triage Swedish fast-track referrals.
methodsWe analysed 2,539 fast-track colonoscopies (2016-2020) and 723 as a validation cohort (2021-2022). Predictors were age, sex, eight symptoms, binary FIT, haemoglobin, and suspicious imaging. In development, missing predictors were imputed within training/test splits; validation used complete cases. Class imbalance was handled with oversampling to balance classes. Logistic regression and CatBoost models were built. External validation assessed AUC, calibration, and calibration slope. Variable influence was examined with feature contribution analysis. Decision-curve analysis (DCA) used the entry rule as a treat-all baseline.
resultsCRC prevalence was 16% in both cohorts. Development AUCs were 0.81 (95% CI 0.78-0.83) for CatBoost and 0.77 (0.74-0.80) for logistic regression. In external validation, AUCs were 0.67 (0.61-0.74) and 0.66 (0.58-0.75), respectively. FIT status, suspicious imaging, and age were the main predictors. Calibration drift was observed. The entry rule functions as treat-all (specificity 0%). CatBoost DCA curves were near or above treat-all at common thresholds, but 95% bands overlapped; advantage over treat-all was not confirmed.
conclusionsA multivariable approach using FIT, simple laboratory data, and clinical findings can support triage in a fast-track pathway. In validation, discrimination was modest, and superiority over the entry rule could not be shown because all referred patients underwent colonoscopy. External testing across regions, recording quantitative FIT, and routine recalibration are needed before implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42706535What 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.