Machine Learning and Feature Selection Applied to SEER Data to Reliably Assess Thyroid Cancer Prognosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Utilizing historical clinical datasets to guide future treatment choices is beneficial for patients and physicians. Machine learning and feature selection algorithms (namely, Fisher's discriminant ratio, Kruskal-Wallis' analysis, and Relief-F) have been combined in this research to analyse a SEER database containing clinical features from de-identified thyroid cancer patients. The data covered 34 unique clinical variables such as patients' age at diagnosis or information regarding lymph nodes, which were employed to build various novel classifiers to distinguish patients that lived for over 10 years since diagnosis, from those who did not survive at least five years. By properly optimizing supervised neural networks, specifically multilayer perceptrons, using data from large groups of thyroid cancer patients (between 6,756 and 20,344 for different models), we demonstrate that unspecialized and existing medical recording can be reliably turned into power of prediction to help doctors make informed and optimized treatment decisions, as distinguishing patients in terms of prognosis has been achieved with 94.5% accuracy. We also envisage the potential of applying our machine learning strategy to other diseases and purposes such as in designing clinical trials for unmasking the maximum benefits and minimizing risks associated with new drug candidates on given populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".