MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393120052 · doi:10.2147/ott.s444536

Development and Validation of a Machine Learning-Based Model Used for Predicting Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk in Patients with Hepatitis B-Related Cirrhosis: A Retrospective Study

2024· article· en· W4393120052 on OpenAlex
Yixin Hou, Jianguo Yan, Ke Shi, Xiaoli Liu, Fangyuan Gao, Tong Wu, Peipei Meng, Min Zhang, Yuyong Jiang, Xianbo Wang

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOncoTargets and Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReceiver operating characteristicCohortRetrospective cohort studyHepatocellular carcinomaInternal medicineConcordanceCirrhosisFramingham Risk Score

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Object: Our objective was to estimate the 5-year cumulative risk of HCC in patients with HBC by utilizing an artificial neural network (ANN). Methods: We conducted this study with 1589 patients hospitalized at Beijing Ditan Hospital of Capital Medical University and People's Liberation Army Fifth Medical Center. The training cohort consisted of 913 subjects from Beijing Ditan Hospital of Capital Medical University, while the validation cohort comprised 676 subjects from People's Liberation Army Fifth Medical Center. Through univariate analysis, we identified factors that independently influenced the occurrence of HCC, which were then used to develop the ANN model. To evaluate the ANN model, we assessed its predictive accuracy, discriminative ability, and clinical net benefit using metrics such as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), concordance index (C-index), calibration curves. Results: In total, we included nine independent risk factors in the development of the ANN model. Remarkably, the AUC of the ANN model was 0.880, significantly outperforming the AUC values of other existing models including mPAGE-B (0.719) (95% CI 0.670-0.768), PAGE-B (0. 710) (95% CI 0.660-0.759), FIB-4 (0.693) (95% CI 0.640-0.745), and Toronto hepatoma risk index (THRI) (0.705) (95% CI 0.654-0.756) (p<0.001 for all). The ANN model effectively stratified patients into low, medium, and high-risk groups based on their 5-year In the training cohort, the positive predictive value (PPV) for low-risk patients was 26.2% (95% CI 25.0-27.4), and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 98.7% (95% CI 95.2-99.7). For high-risk patients, the PPV was 54.7% (95% CI 48.6-60.7), and the NPV was 91.6% (95% CI 89.4-93.4). These findings were validated in the independent validation cohort. Conclusion: The ANNs model has good individualized prediction performance and may be helpful to evaluate the probability of the 5-year risk of HCC in patients with HBC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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