MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410488833 · doi:10.2196/73069

Size-Specific Predictors for Malignancy Risk in Follicular Thyroid Neoplasms: Machine Learning Analysis

2025· article· en· W4410488833 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rui Shan, Fang Mei, Shi-Bing Song, Bang-Kai Sun, Jing Chen, Run-Ze Hu, Yihang Yang, Chun-Hui Yuan, Zheng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintMalignancyThyroidFollicular phaseMedicineOncologyInternal medicineComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Surgeons often face challenges in distinguishing between benign and malignant follicular thyroid neoplasms (FTNs), particularly small tumors, until diagnostic surgery is performed. Objective: This study aimed to identify the size-specific predictors for the malignancy risk of FTNs preoperatively. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Peking University Third Hospital in Beijing, China, from 2012 to 2023. Patients with a postoperative pathological diagnosis of follicular thyroid adenoma (FTA) or follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC) were included. FTNs were classified into small- and large-sized categories based on the cutoff value of the tumor diameter derived from spline regression, which indicated the turning point of malignancy risk. We identified the 5 most important predictors from 22 variables including demography, sonography, and hormones, using machine learning methods. We also calculated the odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI for these predictors in both small- and large-sized FTNs. Results: Altogether, we included 1494 FTNs, comprising 1266 FTAs and 228 FTCs. FTNs with a maximum diameter less than 3.0 cm were grouped as small-sized tumors (n=715), while those with larger diameters were categorized as large-sized tumors (n=779). In the small-sized group, tumors with macrocalcification (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.50-5.60), those with peripheral calcification (OR 4.50, 95% CI 1.50-13.00), and those in younger patients (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05-1.69) showed a higher malignancy risk. In the large-sized group, tumors presenting with a nodule-in-nodule appearance (OR 3.30, 95% CI 1.30-7.90) exhibited a higher malignancy risk. In both groups, lower thyroid-stimulating hormone levels (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.20-1.85 for small-sized FTNs; OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37-1.96 for large-sized FTNs) and a larger mean diameter (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.10-1.70 for small-sized FTNs; OR 1.50 95% CI 1.20-1.70 for large-sized FTNs) were associated with the malignancy risk of FTNs. Conclusions: This study identified size-specific predictors for malignancy risk in FTNs, highlighting the importance of stratified prediction based on tumor size.

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 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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207