ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Development and validation of a machine learning-based risk prediction model for cancer-related fatigue in ovarian cancer patients.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) substantially compromises quality of life in ovarian cancer, yet reliable early detection tools remain inadequate. This study sought to develop a machine learning-based predictive model for CRF risk. Methods: We consecutively recruited 407 ovarian cancer patients from three tertiary hospitals in Lanzhou, China (October 2024-August 2025). Data were randomly partitioned into training (70%) and testing (30%) sets. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression was applied for feature selection. Seven machine learning algorithms were developed, with the optimal model selected through comparative evaluation and subjected to SHAP interpretability analysis. Results: CRF prevalence was 39.6%. The Support Vector Machine (SVM) demonstrated superior overall predictive performance: AUC of 0.884, accuracy of 0.829, sensitivity of 0.816, specificity of 0.838, and F1 score of 0.792; good calibration (Brier score = 0.132); and decision curve analysis showed the highest net benefit across a wide range of threshold probabilities (0.05-0.85), indicating strong clinical utility. SHAP analysis identified serum calcium level, anxiety-depression status, red blood cell count, education level, cancer stage, medical payment method, and marital status as top predictive features. Conclusions: The SVM model exhibits robust predictive efficacy and good clinical utility, serving as a valuable tool for CRF risk stratification in ovarian cancer care. Early identification of high-risk patients enables targeted interventions to improve outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.