Cited by 96Lung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentSmoking Behavior and CessationAI in cancer detection

Deep Q-networks with web-based survey data for simulating lung cancer intervention prediction and assessment in the elderly: a quantitative study

Open access
Chen, Songjing, Wu, Sizhu·2022·BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Abstract

Background: Lung cancer screening and intervention might be important to help detect lung cancer early and reduce the mortality, but little was known about lung cancer intervention strategy associated with intervention effect for preventing lung cancer. We employed Deep Q-Networks (DQN) to respond to this gap. The aim was to quantitatively predict lung cancer optimal intervention strategy and assess intervention effect in aged 65 years and older (the elderly). Methods: We screened lung cancer high risk with web-based survey data and conducted simulative intervention. DQN models were developed to predict optimal intervention strategies to prevent lung cancer in elderly men and elderly women separately. We assessed the intervention effects to evaluate the optimal intervention strategy. Results: Proposed DQN models quantitatively predicted and assessed lung cancer intervention. DQN models performed well in five stratified groups (elderly men, elderly women, men, women and the whole population). Stopping smoking and extending quitting smoking time were optimal intervention strategies in elderly men. Extending quitting time and reducing smoked cigarettes number were optimal intervention strategies in elderly women. In elderly men and women, the maximal reductions of lung cancer incidence were 31.81% and 24.62% separately. Lung cancer incidence trend was deduced from the year of 1984 to 2050, which predicted that the difference of lung cancer incidence between elderly men and women might be significantly decreased after thirty years quitting time. Conclusions: We quantitatively predicted optimal intervention strategy and assessed lung cancer intervention effect in the elderly through DQN models. Those might improve intervention effects and reasonably prevent lung cancer.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12911-021-01695-4

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Word2Vec is capable of unsupervised learning to determine semantic meaning and similarity between words.

    “By leveraging a contextual window, Word2Vec is capable of unsupervised learning to determine semantic meaning and similarity between words (Zhao et al. 2022; Subba and Kumari 2022; Oubenali et al. 2022).”

    From Large language models (LLMs): survey, technical frameworks, and future challenges (2024) · cites this paper as Oubenali et al. 2022

    The Introduction and Discussion discuss deep Q-networks for lung cancer intervention, not Word2Vec. Searches for Word2Vec, contextual windows, word embeddings, and semantic similarity found no passage addressing the claim in our copy. Page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [41]Schaul T, Quan J, Antonoglou I, Silver D. Prioritized experience replay. ICLR. 2016; 1–21.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, S., & Wu, S.
Affiliations
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN)
Venue
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published
2022-01-04
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
1-1
ISSN
1472-6947 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4205619992
Cited by
96
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
14.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • General Project on Humanities and Social Science Research of Ministry of Education of China (19YJC870002)
  • National Key R&D Program of China (2016YFC0901602)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
Keywords
lung cancer prevention, lung cancer screening, deep Q-network, smoking cessation, older adults, sex differences, reinforcement learning
MeSH terms
Aged, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Smoking, Incidence, Internet, Early Detection of Cancer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review