MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386888280 · doi:10.1007/s41666-023-00138-1

Clinical Feature Ranking Based on Ensemble Machine Learning Reveals Top Survival Factors for Glioblastoma Multiforme

2023· article· en· W4386888280 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Healthcare Informatics Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMinistero dell'Università e della RicercaUniversità degli Studi di Milano-BicoccaEuropean CommissionDipartimenti di Eccellenza
KeywordsConcordanceRandom forestArtificial intelligenceMachine learningContext (archaeology)Computer scienceGlioblastomaFeature (linguistics)Decision treeMedicineData miningInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glioblastoma multiforme (GM) is a malignant tumor of the central nervous system considered to be highly aggressive and often carrying a terrible survival prognosis. An accurate prognosis is therefore pivotal for deciding a good treatment plan for patients. In this context, computational intelligence applied to data of electronic health records (EHRs) of patients diagnosed with this disease can be useful to predict the patients' survival time. In this study, we evaluated different machine learning models to predict survival time in patients suffering from glioblastoma and further investigated which features were the most predictive for survival time. We applied our computational methods to three different independent open datasets of EHRs of patients with glioblastoma: the Shieh dataset of 84 patients, the Berendsen dataset of 647 patients, and the Lammer dataset of 60 patients. Our survival time prediction techniques obtained concordance index (C-index) = 0.583 in the Shieh dataset, C-index = 0.776 in the Berendsen dataset, and C-index = 0.64 in the Lammer dataset, as best results in each dataset. Since the original studies regarding the three datasets analyzed here did not provide insights about the most predictive clinical features for survival time, we investigated the feature importance among these datasets. To this end, we then utilized Random Survival Forests, which is a decision tree-based algorithm able to model non-linear interaction between different features and might be able to better capture the highly complex clinical and genetic status of these patients. Our discoveries can impact clinical practice, aiding clinicians and patients alike to decide which therapy plan is best suited for their unique clinical status.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.370 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it