167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38075230)
1. 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]
2. Which model is better in predicting the survival of laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma?: Comparison of the random survival forest based on machine learning algorithms to Cox regression: analyses based on SEER database.
Sun H; Wu S; Li S; Jiang X
Medicine (Baltimore); 2023 Mar; 102(10):e33144. PubMed ID: 36897699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Development and validation of machine learning models for predicting prognosis and guiding individualized postoperative chemotherapy: A real-world study of distal cholangiocarcinoma.
Wang D; Pan B; Huang JC; Chen Q; Cui SP; Lang R; Lyu SC
Front Oncol; 2023; 13():1106029. PubMed ID: 37007095
[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. Mortality prediction and influencing factors for intensive care unit patients with acute tubular necrosis: random survival forest and cox regression analysis.
Zeng J; Zhang M; Du J; Han J; Song Q; Duan T; Yang J; Wu Y
Front Pharmacol; 2024; 15():1361923. PubMed ID: 38846097
[No 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. 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]
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. Study on the prediction model of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the rural Xinjiang population based on survival analysis.
Qian X; Keerman M; Zhang X; Guo H; He J; Maimaitijiang R; Wang X; Ma J; Li Y; Ma R; Guo S
BMC Public Health; 2023 Jun; 23(1):1041. PubMed ID: 37264356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of random survival forest and Cox regression for prediction of mortality in patients with hemorrhagic stroke.
Wang Y; Deng Y; Tan Y; Zhou M; Jiang Y; Liu B
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2023 Oct; 23(1):215. PubMed ID: 37833724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Prediction of lung papillary adenocarcinoma-specific survival using ensemble machine learning models.
Xia K; Chen D; Jin S; Yi X; Luo L
Sci Rep; 2023 Sep; 13(1):14827. PubMed ID: 37684259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Individual mortality risk predictive system of patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure based on a random survival forest model.
Zhang ZQ; He G; Luo ZW; Cheng CC; Wang P; Li J; Zhu MG; Ming L; He TS; Ouyang YL; Huang YY; Wu XL; Ye YN
Chin Med J (Engl); 2021 Jun; 134(14):1701-1708. PubMed ID: 34133353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. [Construction of a Risk Prediction Model for Lung Cancer Based on Lifestyle Behaviors in the UK Biobank Large-Scale Population Cohort].
Chen R; Wang J; Wang S; Tang S; Suo C
Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2023 Sep; 54(5):892-898. PubMed ID: 37866943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A prediction model based on random survival forest analysis of the overall survival of elderly female papillary thyroid carcinoma patients: a SEER-based study.
Lun Y; Yuan H; Ma P; Chen J; Lu P; Wang W; Liang R; Zhang J; Gao W; Ding X; Li S; Wang Z; Guo J; Lu L
Endocrine; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38558373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Development and validation of a machine learning model to predict imminent new vertebral fractures after vertebral augmentation.
Jiang Y; Cai J; Zeng Y; Ye H; Yang T; Liu Z; Liu Q
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2023 Jun; 24(1):472. PubMed ID: 37296426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Prognosis prediction for glioblastoma multiforme patients using machine learning approaches: Development of the clinically applicable model.
Kim Y; Kim KH; Park J; Yoon HI; Sung W
Radiother Oncol; 2023 Jun; 183():109617. PubMed ID: 36921767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
