141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34441964)
1. Bi-Centric Independent Validation of Outcome Prediction after Radioembolization of Primary and Secondary Liver Cancer.
Fabritius MP; Seidensticker M; Rueckel J; Heinze C; Pech M; Paprottka KJ; Paprottka PM; Topalis J; Bender A; Ricke J; Mittermeier A; Ingrisch M
J Clin Med; 2021 Aug; 10(16):. PubMed ID: 34441964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prediction of
Ingrisch M; Schöppe F; Paprottka K; Fabritius M; Strobl FF; De Toni EN; Ilhan H; Todica A; Michl M; Paprottka PM
J Nucl Med; 2018 May; 59(5):769-773. PubMed ID: 29146692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Development and visualization of a risk prediction model for metabolic syndrome: a longitudinal cohort study based on health check-up data in China.
Liu W; Tang X; Cui T; Zhao H; Song G
Front Nutr; 2023; 10():1286654. PubMed ID: 38075230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prognosis prediction of extremity and trunk wall soft-tissue sarcomas treated with surgical resection with radiomic analysis based on random survival forest.
Yang Y; Ma X; Wang Y; Ding X
Updates Surg; 2022 Feb; 74(1):355-365. PubMed ID: 34003477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A Comparison Study of Machine Learning (Random Survival Forest) and Classic Statistic (Cox Proportional Hazards) for Predicting Progression in High-Grade Glioma after Proton and Carbon Ion Radiotherapy.
Qiu X; Gao J; Yang J; Hu J; Hu W; Kong L; Lu JJ
Front Oncol; 2020; 10():551420. PubMed ID: 33194609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
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. 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]
9. Explainable deep learning-based survival prediction for non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing radical radiotherapy.
Astley JR; Reilly JM; Robinson S; Wild JM; Hatton MQ; Tahir BA
Radiother Oncol; 2024 Apr; 193():110084. PubMed ID: 38244779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Machine learning-based prediction of 1-year mortality for acute coronary syndrome
Hadanny A; Shouval R; Wu J; Gale CP; Unger R; Zahger D; Gottlieb S; Matetzky S; Goldenberg I; Beigel R; Iakobishvili Z
J Cardiol; 2022 Mar; 79(3):342-351. PubMed ID: 34857429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Development and validation of survival prediction model for gastric adenocarcinoma patients using deep learning: A SEER-based study.
Zeng J; Li K; Cao F; Zheng Y
Front Oncol; 2023; 13():1131859. PubMed ID: 36959782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Machine Learning-Based Overall Survival Prediction of Elderly Patients With Multiple Myeloma From Multicentre Real-Life Data.
Bao L; Wang YT; Zhuang JL; Liu AJ; Dong YJ; Chu B; Chen XH; Lu MQ; Shi L; Gao S; Fang LJ; Xiang QQ; Ding YH
Front Oncol; 2022; 12():922039. PubMed ID: 35865475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Does the SORG Algorithm Predict 5-year Survival in Patients with Chondrosarcoma? An External Validation.
Bongers MER; Thio QCBS; Karhade AV; Stor ML; Raskin KA; Lozano Calderon SA; DeLaney TF; Ferrone ML; Schwab JH
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2019 Oct; 477(10):2296-2303. PubMed ID: 31107338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Deep Learning Predicts the Malignant-Transformation-Free Survival of Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders.
Adeoye J; Koohi-Moghadam M; Lo AWI; Tsang RK; Chow VLY; Zheng LW; Choi SW; Thomson P; Su YX
Cancers (Basel); 2021 Dec; 13(23):. PubMed ID: 34885164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Identification of a Sixteen-gene Prognostic Biomarker for Lung Adenocarcinoma Using a Machine Learning Method.
Ma B; Geng Y; Meng F; Yan G; Song F
J Cancer; 2020; 11(5):1288-1298. PubMed ID: 31956375
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Machine Learning-Based Prognostic Model for Patients After Lung Transplantation.
Tian D; Yan HJ; Huang H; Zuo YJ; Liu MZ; Zhao J; Wu B; Shi LZ; Chen JY
JAMA Netw Open; 2023 May; 6(5):e2312022. PubMed ID: 37145595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components.
Tran TT; Lee J; Gunathilake M; Kim J; Kim SY; Cho H; Kim J
Front Oncol; 2023; 13():1049787. PubMed ID: 36937438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Novel head and neck cancer survival analysis approach: random survival forests versus Cox proportional hazards regression.
Datema FR; Moya A; Krause P; Bäck T; Willmes L; Langeveld T; Baatenburg de Jong RJ; Blom HM
Head Neck; 2012 Jan; 34(1):50-8. PubMed ID: 21322080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Individual risk prediction: Comparing random forests with Cox proportional-hazards model by a simulation study.
Baralou V; Kalpourtzi N; Touloumi G
Biom J; 2023 Aug; 65(6):e2100380. PubMed ID: 36169048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Radiomic Profiling of Glioblastoma: Identifying an Imaging Predictor of Patient Survival with Improved Performance over Established Clinical and Radiologic Risk Models.
Kickingereder P; Burth S; Wick A; Götz M; Eidel O; Schlemmer HP; Maier-Hein KH; Wick W; Bendszus M; Radbruch A; Bonekamp D
Radiology; 2016 Sep; 280(3):880-9. PubMed ID: 27326665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
