A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

A feasibility study on utilizing machine learning technology to reduce the costs of gastric cancer screening in Taizhou, China. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Aim: To optimize gastric cancer screening score and reduce screening costs using machine learning models.

Methods: This study included 228,634 patients from the Taizhou Gastric Cancer Screening Program. We used three machine learning models to optimize Li's gastric cancer screening score: Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Distributed Random Forest (DRF), and Deep Learning (DL). The performance of the binary classification models was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUCPR).

Results: In the binary classification model used to distinguish low-risk and moderate- to high-risk patients, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL full models were 0.9994, 0.9982, and 0.9974, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9982, 0.9949, and 0.9918, respectively. Excluding IgG antibody, pepsinogen I, and pepsinogen II, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL models were 0.9932, 0.9879, and 0.9900, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9835, 0.9716, and 0.9752, respectively. Remodel after removing variables IgG, PGI, PGII, and G-17, the AUC in GBM, DRF, and DL was 0.8524, 0.8482, 0.8477, and AUCPR was 0.6068, 0.6008, and 0.5890, respectively. When constructing a tri-classification model, we discovered that none of the three machine learning models could effectively distinguish between patients at intermediate and high risk for gastric cancer (F1 scores in the GBM model for the low, medium and high risk: 0.9750, 0.9193, 0.5334, respectively; F1 scores in the DRF model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9888, 0.9479, 0.6694, respectively; F1 scores in the DL model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9812, 0.9216, 0.6394, respectively).

Conclusion: We concluded that gastric cancer screening indicators could be optimized when distinguishing low-risk and moderate to high-risk populations, and detecting gastrin-17 alone can achieve a good discriminative effect, thus saving huge expenditures.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378168PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20552076241277713DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

gastric cancer
24
cancer screening
20
machine learning
16
auc gbm
12
gbm drf
12
model low
12
low medium
12
medium high
12
screening score
8
three machine
8

Similar Publications