• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparison of the predictive qualities of three prognostic models of colorectal cancer.三种结直肠癌预后模型预测质量的比较。
Front Biosci (Elite Ed). 2010 Jun 1;2(3):849-56. doi: 10.2741/e146.
2
Artificial neural networks--a method for prediction of survival following liver resection for colorectal cancer metastases.人工神经网络——一种预测结直肠癌肝转移切除术后生存的方法。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Jun;39(6):648-54. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.02.024. Epub 2013 Mar 17.
3
Comparison of artificial neural networks with logistic regression in prediction of in-hospital death after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术后院内死亡预测中人工神经网络与逻辑回归的比较
Am Heart J. 2000 Sep;140(3):511-20. doi: 10.1067/mhj.2000.109223.
4
Artificial neural networks improve the accuracy of cancer survival prediction.人工神经网络提高了癌症生存预测的准确性。
Cancer. 1997 Feb 15;79(4):857-62. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19970215)79:4<857::aid-cncr24>3.0.co;2-y.
5
Artificial neural network for prediction of distant metastasis in colorectal cancer.用于预测结直肠癌远处转移的人工神经网络
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2012;13(3):927-30. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2012.13.3.927.
6
Predicting survival in patients with brain metastases treated with radiosurgery using artificial neural networks.利用人工神经网络预测接受放射外科治疗的脑转移瘤患者的生存情况。
Neurosurgery. 2013 Jun;72(6):944-51; discussion 952. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31828ea04b.
7
Predicting the graft survival for heart-lung transplantation patients: an integrated data mining methodology.预测心肺移植患者的移植物存活率:一种综合数据挖掘方法。
Int J Med Inform. 2009 Dec;78(12):e84-96. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.04.007. Epub 2009 Jun 3.
8
Use of an artificial neural network to predict head injury outcome.利用人工神经网络预测颅脑损伤结局。
J Neurosurg. 2010 Sep;113(3):585-90. doi: 10.3171/2009.11.JNS09857.
9
Prediction of transition from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease based on a logistic regression-artificial neural network-decision tree model.基于逻辑回归-人工神经网络-决策树模型预测轻度认知障碍向阿尔茨海默病的转变。
Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2021 Jan;21(1):43-47. doi: 10.1111/ggi.14097. Epub 2020 Dec 1.
10
Comparison of three data mining models for predicting diabetes or prediabetes by risk factors.三种数据挖掘模型预测糖尿病或糖尿病前期的危险因素比较。
Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2013 Feb;29(2):93-9. doi: 10.1016/j.kjms.2012.08.016. Epub 2012 Oct 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of three data mining models for prediction of advanced schistosomiasis prognosis in the Hubei province.比较三种数据挖掘模型在预测湖北省晚期血吸虫病预后中的应用。
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018 Feb 15;12(2):e0006262. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006262. eCollection 2018 Feb.
2
Comparison of Basic and Ensemble Data Mining Methods in Predicting 5-Year Survival of Colorectal Cancer Patients.基础数据挖掘方法与集成数据挖掘方法在预测结直肠癌患者5年生存率中的比较
Acta Inform Med. 2017 Dec;25(4):254-258. doi: 10.5455/aim.2017.25.254-258.
3
Development of clinical decision rules to predict recurrent shock in dengue.预测登革热复发性休克的临床决策规则的制定。
Crit Care. 2013 Dec 2;17(6):R280. doi: 10.1186/cc13135.
4
Which is a more accurate predictor in colorectal survival analysis? Nine data mining algorithms vs. the TNM staging system.在结直肠癌生存分析中,哪种方法更准确?9 种数据挖掘算法与 TNM 分期系统的比较。
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e42015. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042015. Epub 2012 Jul 25.
5
Epithelial-mesenchymal transition biomarkers and support vector machine guided model in preoperatively predicting regional lymph node metastasis for rectal cancer.上皮-间充质转化生物标志物和支持向量机引导的模型在术前预测直肠癌区域淋巴结转移中的应用。
Br J Cancer. 2012 May 22;106(11):1735-41. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.82. Epub 2012 Apr 26.
6
Molecular prognostic prediction for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma by support vector machine integrated approach.基于支持向量机的集成方法对局部晚期鼻咽癌的分子预后预测。
PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e31989. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031989. Epub 2012 Mar 9.
7
Development and progression of colorectal neoplasia.结直肠肿瘤的发展和演进。
Cancer Biomark. 2010;9(1-6):235-65. doi: 10.3233/CBM-2011-0160.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of predicted probabilities of proportional hazards regression and linear discriminant analysis methods using a colorectal cancer molecular biomarker database.使用结直肠癌分子生物标志物数据库对比例风险回归和线性判别分析方法的预测概率进行比较。
Cancer Inform. 2007 Mar 2;3:115-22.
2
The American Joint Committee on Cancer: updating the strategies in cancer staging.美国癌症联合委员会:更新癌症分期策略。
Bull Am Coll Surg. 2002 Jul;87(7):13-5.
3
Accuracy of intelligent medical systems.智能医疗系统的准确性。
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2005 Dec;80 Suppl 1:S95-S105. doi: 10.1016/s0169-2607(05)80010-0.
4
Predicting breast cancer survivability: a comparison of three data mining methods.预测乳腺癌的生存能力:三种数据挖掘方法的比较
Artif Intell Med. 2005 Jun;34(2):113-27. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2004.07.002.
5
Comparative analysis of logistic regression and artificial neural network for computer-aided diagnosis of breast masses.用于乳腺肿块计算机辅助诊断的逻辑回归与人工神经网络的对比分析
Acad Radiol. 2005 Apr;12(4):487-95. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2004.12.016.
6
Clarification in the point/counterpoint discussion related to surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometric identification of patients with adenocarcinomas of the prostate.关于表面增强激光解吸/电离飞行时间质谱法鉴定前列腺腺癌患者的正反观点讨论中的澄清。
Clin Chem. 2004 Aug;50(8):1475-6; author reply 1476-7. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2004.033456.
7
An artificial neural network to predict the outcome of repeat prostate biopsies.一种用于预测重复前列腺活检结果的人工神经网络。
Urology. 2003 Sep;62(3):456-60. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(03)00409-6.
8
Neural networks in the prediction of survival in patients with colorectal cancer.神经网络在预测结直肠癌患者生存率中的应用
Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2003 Feb;2(4):239-44. doi: 10.3816/CCC.2003.n.005.
9
Artificial neural network analysis for predicting pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer in the Japanese population.用于预测日本人群临床局限性前列腺癌病理分期的人工神经网络分析
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2002 Dec;32(12):530-5. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyf114.
10
Data mining and healthcare informatics.数据挖掘与医疗保健信息学。
Am J Health Behav. 2001 May-Jun;25(3):285-9. doi: 10.5993/ajhb.25.3.16.

三种结直肠癌预后模型预测质量的比较。

Comparison of the predictive qualities of three prognostic models of colorectal cancer.

作者信息

Anderson Billie, Hardin J Michael, Alexander Dominik D, Grizzle William E, Meleth Sreelatha, Manne Upender

机构信息

SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA.

出版信息

Front Biosci (Elite Ed). 2010 Jun 1;2(3):849-56. doi: 10.2741/e146.

DOI:10.2741/e146
PMID:20515758
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3658118/
Abstract

Most discoveries of cancer biomarkers involve construction of a single model to determine predictions of survival.. 'Data-mining' techniques, such as artificial neural networks (ANNs), perform better than traditional methods, such as logistic regression. In this study, the quality of multiple predictive models built on a molecular data set for colorectal cancer (CRC) was evaluated. Predictive models (logistic regressions, ANNs, and decision trees) were compared, and the effect of techniques for variable selection on the predictive quality of these models was investigated. The Kolmogorov-Smirnoff (KS) statistic was used to compare the models. Overall, the logistic regression and ANN methods outperformed use of a decision tree. In some instances (e.g., for a model that included 'all variables without tumor stage' and use of a decision tree for variable selection), the ANN marginally outperformed logistic regression, although the difference between the accuracy of the KS statistic was minimal (0.80 versus 0.82). Regardless of the variable(s) and the methods for variable selection, all three predictive models identified survivors and non-survivors with the same level of statistical accuracy.

摘要

大多数癌症生物标志物的发现都涉及构建单一模型来确定生存预测。“数据挖掘”技术,如人工神经网络(ANN),比传统方法,如逻辑回归,表现更好。在本研究中,评估了基于结直肠癌(CRC)分子数据集构建的多个预测模型的质量。比较了预测模型(逻辑回归、人工神经网络和决策树),并研究了变量选择技术对这些模型预测质量的影响。使用Kolmogorov-Smirnoff(KS)统计量来比较模型。总体而言,逻辑回归和人工神经网络方法优于决策树的使用。在某些情况下(例如,对于一个包含“所有不包括肿瘤分期的变量”的模型以及使用决策树进行变量选择),人工神经网络略优于逻辑回归,尽管KS统计量准确性之间的差异很小(0.80对0.82)。无论变量和变量选择方法如何,所有三种预测模型识别幸存者和非幸存者的统计准确性水平相同。