2019
DOI: 10.21203/rs.2.18222/v1
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A post-method condition analysis of using ensemble machine learning for cancer prognosis and diagnosis: a systematic review

Abstract: Background: Ensemble methods are supervised learning approaches that integrate different types of data or multiple individual classifiers. It has been shown that these methods can improve professional performance.Methods: This study is an attempt to provide an in-depth review on 45 most relevant articles and aims to introduce 42 ensemble classifier (EC) machine learning methods used for the detection of 18 different types of cancer. Compared to other types of cancer, breast cancer, and the 22 ensemble methods … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

2
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Since then, many ensemble classi cation methods have been applied to breast cancer prognosis (9). In this regard, we reviewed 42 ensemble methods related to 18 cancers (10). Among these, 22 approaches have been reported for analyzing breast cancer data in the literature (Table 1).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then, many ensemble classi cation methods have been applied to breast cancer prognosis (9). In this regard, we reviewed 42 ensemble methods related to 18 cancers (10). Among these, 22 approaches have been reported for analyzing breast cancer data in the literature (Table 1).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then, many ensemble classi cation methods have been applied to breast cancer prognosis (12). In this regard, we reviewed 42 ensemble methods related to 18 cancers (13). Among these, 22 approaches have been reported for analyzing breast cancer data in the literature (Table 1).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%