Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38605059›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Predictive modeling for breast cancer classification in the context of Bangladeshi patients by use of machine learning approach with explainable AI.

Taminul Islam, Md Alif Sheakh, Mst Sazia Tahosin, Most Hasna Hena, Shopnil Akash, Yousef A Bin Jardan, Gezahign FentahunWondmie, Hiba-Allah Nafidi, Mohammed Bourhia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Explainability in AI-enabled medical neurotechnology: a scoping review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Taminul IslamSchool of Computing, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Carbondale, IL, USA.
Md Alif SheakhDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Mst Sazia TahosinDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Most Hasna HenaDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Shopnil AkashDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Yousef A Bin JardanDepartment of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, P.O. Box 11451, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Gezahign FentahunWondmieDepartment of Biology, Bahir Dar University, P.O. Box 79, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. resercherfent@gmail.com.
Hiba-Allah NafidiDepartment of Food Science, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Laval University, 2325, Quebec City, QC, G1V 0A6, Canada.
Mohammed BourhiaLaboratory of Biotechnology and Natural Resources Valorization, Ibn Zohr University, 80060, Agadir, Morocco.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer has rapidly increased in prevalence in recent years, making it one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. Among all cancers, it is by far the most common. Diagnosing this illness manually requires significant time and expertise. Since detecting breast cancer is a time-consuming process, preventing its further spread can be aided by creating machine-based forecasts. Machine learning and Explainable AI are crucial in classification as they not only provide accurate predictions but also offer insights into how the model arrives at its decisions, aiding in the understanding and trustworthiness of the classification results. In this study, we evaluate and compare the classification accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 scores of five different machine learning methods using a primary dataset (500 patients from Dhaka Medical College Hospital). Five different supervised machine learning techniques, including decision tree, random forest, logistic regression, naive bayes, and XGBoost, have been used to achieve optimal results on our dataset. Additionally, this study applied SHAP analysis to the XGBoost model to interpret the model's predictions and understand the impact of each feature on the model's output. We compared the accuracy with which several algorithms classified the data, as well as contrasted with other literature in this field. After final evaluation, this study found that XGBoost achieved the best model accuracy, which is 97%.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsBangladeshBayes TheoremBreastFemaleHumansHydrolasesMachine LearningHydrolasesBreast cancer predictionCancer predictionExplainable AIHyperparameter tuningMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID38605059
PMCPMC11009331

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.