PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 27, 2026BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making0 citationsOpen Access

Development and interpretability of an XGBoost model to predict high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

THTao HongZTZhengjiao TongHLHongtao Li

Key Points

  • The aim is to develop and assess machine learning models for predicting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+ and CIN3+).
  • Retrospective analysis including 2,863 participants.
  • Development of three models: Logistic Regression, Random Forest, and XGBoost.
  • Dataset split into training (60%) and test (40%) sets.
  • Model performance evaluated using AUC, calibration curves, decision curve analysis, NRI, and IDI.
  • SHAP method used for model interpretability.
  • XGBoost model achieved highest test set AUCs: 0.735 for CIN2+ and 0.841 for CIN3+.
  • Significant AUC improvement for CIN3+ detection compared to Random Forest model (P < 0.001).
  • XGBoost showed notable NRI: 13.1% for CIN2+ and 28.0% for CIN3+ over Logistic Regression.
  • IDI for XGBoost was significant: 12.1% for CIN2+ and 11.0% for CIN3+.

Abstract

Effective risk stratification is crucial for managing cervical lesions. This study aimed to develop and evaluate machine learning models to improve the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and CIN3+. This retrospective study included 2,863 participants. We developed three models: a Logistic Regression (Logit.Model), a Random Forest (RF.Model), and an XGBoost (XGBoost.Model) to predict CIN2 + and CIN3 + status. The dataset was split into training (60%) and test (40%) sets. Model performance was assessed using AUC, calibration curves, decision curve analysis (DCA), net reclassification improvement (NRI), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). The SHapley Additive explanation (SHAP) method was employed for model interpretation. XGBoost.Model demonstrated robust performance, achieving the highest test set AUCs of 0.735 for CIN2 + and 0.841 for CIN3+. It showed significantly higher AUC for CIN3 + detection compared to RF.Model (P < 0.001). XGBoost.Model also provided significant NRI (13.1% for CIN2+, 28.0% for CIN3+) and IDI (12.1% for CIN2+, 11.0% for CIN3+) over the Logit.Model (all P < 0.05). SHAP analysis confirmed the model’s interpretability, highlighting key predictive features such as cytology and specific HPV genotypes. The XGBoost.Model exhibited superior and consistent performance, achieving the highest test set AUC and providing a significant NRI and IDI over the logistic regression model. Not applicable.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hong et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69a134fbed1d949a99abe66bhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-026-03413-4
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Calibrated and Explainable CIN2+ Risk Stratification Using Routine Clinical Data: Development and External Validation2026
  2. 2CINPred: a risk prediction tool for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia2026
  3. 3Machine Learning in Early Screening for High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Using Blood Testing2025
  4. 4Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting 5-year recurrence in breast cancer2026
  5. 5Machine Learning-Based Risk Factor Analysis for Cervical Cancer Prediction: AComparative Study of Class Imbalance Handling Strategies with SHAP-Driven Clinical Risk Stratification2026