388 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33198650)
1. Survival prediction models since liver transplantation - comparisons between Cox models and machine learning techniques.
Kantidakis G; Putter H; Lancia C; Boer J; Braat AE; Fiocco M
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Nov; 20(1):277. PubMed ID: 33198650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A Simulation Study to Compare the Predictive Performance of Survival Neural Networks with Cox Models for Clinical Trial Data.
Kantidakis G; Biganzoli E; Putter H; Fiocco M
Comput Math Methods Med; 2021; 2021():2160322. PubMed ID: 34880930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dementia risk prediction in individuals with mild cognitive impairment: a comparison of Cox regression and machine learning models.
Wang M; Greenberg M; Forkert ND; Chekouo T; Afriyie G; Ismail Z; Smith EE; Sajobi TT
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Nov; 22(1):284. PubMed ID: 36324086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Artificial intelligence for predicting survival following deceased donor liver transplantation: Retrospective multi-center study.
Yu YD; Lee KS; Man Kim J; Ryu JH; Lee JG; Lee KW; Kim BW; Kim DS;
Int J Surg; 2022 Sep; 105():106838. PubMed ID: 36028137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Statistical models versus machine learning for competing risks: development and validation of prognostic models.
Kantidakis G; Putter H; Litière S; Fiocco M
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Feb; 23(1):51. PubMed ID: 36829145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Using machine learning techniques to develop risk prediction models to predict graft failure following kidney transplantation: protocol for a retrospective cohort study.
Senanayake S; Barnett A; Graves N; Healy H; Baboolal K; Kularatna S
F1000Res; 2019; 8():1810. PubMed ID: 32419922
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. A comparative study of forest methods for time-to-event data: variable selection and predictive performance.
Liu Y; Zhou S; Wei H; An S
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Sep; 21(1):193. PubMed ID: 34563138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Classification of imbalanced data using machine learning algorithms to predict the risk of renal graft failures in Ethiopia.
Mulugeta G; Zewotir T; Tegegne AS; Juhar LH; Muleta MB
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2023 May; 23(1):98. PubMed ID: 37217892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Machine learning in predicting graft failure following kidney transplantation: A systematic review of published predictive models.
Senanayake S; White N; Graves N; Healy H; Baboolal K; Kularatna S
Int J Med Inform; 2019 Oct; 130():103957. PubMed ID: 31472443
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Predicting Colorectal Cancer Survival Using Time-to-Event Machine Learning: Retrospective Cohort Study.
Yang X; Qiu H; Wang L; Wang X
J Med Internet Res; 2023 Oct; 25():e44417. PubMed ID: 37883174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Predictive Abilities of Machine Learning Techniques May Be Limited by Dataset Characteristics: Insights From the UNOS Database.
Miller PE; Pawar S; Vaccaro B; McCullough M; Rao P; Ghosh R; Warier P; Desai NR; Ahmad T
J Card Fail; 2019 Jun; 25(6):479-483. PubMed ID: 30738152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Risk factors associated with major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events following percutaneous coronary intervention: a 10-year follow-up comparing random survival forest and Cox proportional-hazards model.
Farhadian M; Dehdar Karsidani S; Mozayanimonfared A; Mahjub H
BMC Cardiovasc Disord; 2021 Jan; 21(1):38. PubMed ID: 33461487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A machine learning-based approach to prognostic analysis of thoracic transplantations.
Delen D; Oztekin A; Kong ZJ
Artif Intell Med; 2010 May; 49(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 20153956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Application and Comparison of Machine Learning Models for the Prediction of Breast Cancer Prognosis: Retrospective Cohort Study.
Xiao J; Mo M; Wang Z; Zhou C; Shen J; Yuan J; He Y; Zheng Y
JMIR Med Inform; 2022 Feb; 10(2):e33440. PubMed ID: 35179504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Predicting the graft survival for heart-lung transplantation patients: an integrated data mining methodology.
Oztekin A; Delen D; Kong ZJ
Int J Med Inform; 2009 Dec; 78(12):e84-96. PubMed ID: 19497782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of time-to-event machine learning models in predicting oral cavity cancer prognosis.
Adeoye J; Hui L; Koohi-Moghadam M; Tan JY; Choi SW; Thomson P
Int J Med Inform; 2022 Jan; 157():104635. PubMed ID: 34800847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Mortality risk prediction in burn injury: Comparison of logistic regression with machine learning approaches.
Stylianou N; Akbarov A; Kontopantelis E; Buchan I; Dunn KW
Burns; 2015 Aug; 41(5):925-34. PubMed ID: 25931158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Machine Learning Support for Decision-Making in Kidney Transplantation: Step-by-step Development of a Technological Solution.
Paquette FX; Ghassemi A; Bukhtiyarova O; Cisse M; Gagnon N; Della Vecchia A; Rabearivelo HA; Loudiyi Y
JMIR Med Inform; 2022 Jun; 10(6):e34554. PubMed ID: 35700006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Sample size and predictive performance of machine learning methods with survival data: A simulation study.
Infante G; Miceli R; Ambrogi F
Stat Med; 2023 Dec; 42(30):5657-5675. PubMed ID: 37947168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A Machine Learning Approach Using Survival Statistics to Predict Graft Survival in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Multicenter Cohort Study.
Yoo KD; Noh J; Lee H; Kim DK; Lim CS; Kim YH; Lee JP; Kim G; Kim YS
Sci Rep; 2017 Aug; 7(1):8904. PubMed ID: 28827646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
