MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983557630

Multicriteria Decision Analysis Methodology for Medical Diagnosis Aid

2003· article· en· W6983557630 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMemory, History, Trauma, Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical diagnosisObject (grammar)Set (abstract data type)Decision ruleAcute leukemiaFunction (biology)Test (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to present the original methodology of acute leukemia diagnosis using a new classification procedure, called PROCTN. This procedure belongs to multicriteria decision analysis area and it is based on the scoring function to determine a subset of prototypes, which represent the closest resemblance with an object to be assigned. Then it applies the majority-voting rule to assign an object to a class. The implementation of PROCTN was carried out on cytological data of 108 cases of acute leukemia, using the classification rules of French, American and British hematologists, and was then applied on an independent test set of 83 cases of acute leukemia. Each case was defined by forty-seven parameters obtained by examining patient's bone marrow smears with optical microscope. In order to determine the percentage of correct classification of each subtype of acute leukemia, we have compared the results obtained by the procedure with the results given previously by the hematologist. 90 % of the cases were correctly classified by the proposed procedure. These primary results are satisfactory and show the efficiency of the new procedure. Although still an investigative method, the preliminary results are very encouraging and demonstrate the potential performances of this procedure for solving medical classification problems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicMemory, History, Trauma, IdentityFrench-language works237,207