ArticlePatterns (New York, N.Y.)2026
Sample size calculation for training ensemble machine learning models on health data.
Article in Patterns (New York, N.Y.), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health research studies often suffer from small sample sizes, and training machine learning (ML) models requires large datasets. There is a dearth of literature on determining the adequate sample size for using ML models. We developed an empirically derived sample size calculator for ensemble ML models: random forests and two gradient-boosted decision trees (light gradient boosting machine [LGBM] and extreme gradient boosting [XGBoost]). This predicts the sample size required to achieve a pre-defined level of prognostic performance with a certain probability. Prognostic performance is defined as the sample area under the ROC curve (ROC-AUC) relative to the optimal model trained on the full (population) dataset. Our calculator's accuracy was compared to three common heuristics and a statistical approach to sample size calculation. For example, the median relative error sample size prediction was 25% to achieve 85% of the optimal performance with 90% certainty for LGBM. Our model has significantly better accuracy than other methods for tree-based ensemble ML models.
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.