Analytical Analysis of Five Machine Learning Implementations for Patient Treatments Classification

Clicks: 1
ID: 312626
2025
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #468 of 705 articles by views in Journal of Computing & Biomedical Informatics

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 705 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
The study reports a wide-ranging comparative review of five machine learning (ML) implementations applied to one patient treatment dataset with the same classification task: determining treatment type from patient information. Methodological differences, model design, preprocessing techniques, and performance results are reviewed to determine best practice and real-world insight for practitioners and researchers. Through controlled benchmarking, we contrast traditional models (e.g., decision trees, logistic regression) with ensemble and neural network ones, examining trade-offs in accuracy, complexity, interpretability, and computational complexity. Our results demonstrate that stacking classifiers and neural networks tend to perform better than simpler models at an accuracy of 73–75%, though in some cases sacrificing explainability and training time. The research also recognizes some of the common issues including class imbalance, feature selection methods, and constraints in cross-validation and hyperparameter tuning. From these observations, we suggest practical recommendations for model choice, dataset preprocessing, and future studies. Our contribution lies in synthesizing practical and methodological insights from five parallel implementations, offering guidance to ML practitioners working on structured healthcare data and extending discussion to generalizable patterns relevant to similar domains
Reference Key
imported_1777055435_69ebb6cb663f5 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Khalid Hamid
Journal Journal of Computing & Biomedical Informatics
Year 2025
DOI
DOI not found
URL
https://jcbi.org/index.php/Main/article/view/1047
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.