Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29904574›Full record

ArticleF1000Research

Collaboration between a human group and artificial intelligence can improve prediction of multiple sclerosis course: a proof-of-principle study.

Andrea Tacchella, Silvia Romano, Michela Ferraldeschi, Marco Salvetti, Andrea Zaccaria, Andrea Crisanti, Francesca Grassi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Digital Twins for Multiple Sclerosis.Frontiers in immunology · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Scientific Discovery Games for Biomedical Research.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2019
    Article
  19. What is Evidence-Based Functional Medicine in the 21st Century?Integrative medicine (Encinitas, Calif.) · 2019
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Andrea Tacchella *Institute for Complex Systems, National Research Council - UOS Sapienza, Rome, 00185, Italy.
Silvia Romano *Center for Experimental Neurological Therapies (CENTERS), Dept. of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Sensory Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, 00189, Italy.
Michela FerraldeschiCenter for Experimental Neurological Therapies (CENTERS), Dept. of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Sensory Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, 00189, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8157-795X
Marco SalvettiCenter for Experimental Neurological Therapies (CENTERS), Dept. of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Sensory Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, 00189, Italy.
Andrea ZaccariaInstitute for Complex Systems, National Research Council - UOS Sapienza, Rome, 00185, Italy.
Andrea CrisantiDepartment of Physics, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, 00185, Italy.
Francesca GrassiInstitute Pasteur-Cenci Bolognetti Foundation, Dept. Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, 00185, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0169-8397

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

collective intelligenceCrowdsourcingHybrid predictionsMachine learningMultiple sclerosisRandom Forest

Identifiers

PMID29904574
PMCPMC5990125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.