ArticleNeuroinformatics2019
Model-Based and Model-Free Techniques for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Diagnostic Prediction and Patient Clustering.
Article in Neuroinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using blood data for the differential diagnosis and prognosis of motor neuron diseases: a new dataset for machine learning applications.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- Identification of molecular and clinical ALS subgroups based on TDP-43 loss of function molecular markers from population-based patient-derived iPS motor neurons.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Prognostic factors affecting ALS progression through disease tollgates.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Predicting clinical events characterizing the progression of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis via machine learning approaches using routine visits data: a feasibility study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Improving prediction models of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) using polygenic, pre-existing conditions, and survey-based risk scores in the UK Biobank.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Improving prediction models of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) using polygenic, pre-existing conditions, and survey-based risk scores in the UK Biobank.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in the Diagnosis of Neuromuscular Diseases: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2023Review
- Deep learning methods to predict amyotrophic lateral sclerosis disease progression.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Predicting functional impairment trajectories in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a probabilistic, multifactorial model of disease progression.Journal of neurology · 2022Article
- Identifying and predicting amyotrophic lateral sclerosis clinical subgroups: a population-based machine-learning study.The Lancet. Digital health · 2022Article
- Recent advances in the diagnosis and prognosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.The Lancet. Neurology · 2022Review
- Kimesurface Representation and Tensor Linear Modeling of Longitudinal Data.Neural computing & applications · 2022Article
- Modeling and prediction of pressure injury in hospitalized patients using artificial intelligence.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Manifold learning for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis functional loss assessment : Development and validation of a prognosis model.Journal of neurology · 2021Article
- A data value metric for quantifying information content and utility.Journal of big data · 2021Article
- New directions in clinical trials for frontotemporal lobar degeneration: Methods and outcome measures.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2020Article
- ALS/SURV: a modification of the CAFS statistic.Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a complex progressive neurodegenerative disorder with an estimated prevalence of about 5 per 100,000 people in the United States. In this study, the ALS disease progression is measured by the change of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS) score over time. The study aims to provide clinical decision support for timely forecasting of the ALS trajectory as well as accurate and reproducible computable phenotypic clustering of participants. Patient data are extracted from DREAM-Phil Bowen ALS Prediction Prize4Life Challenge data, most of which are from the Pooled Resource Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials Database (PRO-ACT) archive. We employed model-based and model-free machine-learning methods to predict the change of the ALSFRS score over time. Using training and testing data we quantified and compared the performance of different techniques. We also used unsupervised machine learning methods to cluster the patients into separate computable phenotypes and interpret the derived subcohorts. Direct prediction of univariate clinical outcomes based on model-based (linear models) or model-free (machine learning based techniques - random forest and Bayesian adaptive regression trees) was only moderately successful. The correlation coefficients between clinically observed changes in ALSFRS scores relative to the model-based/model-free predicted counterparts were 0.427 (random forest) and 0.545(BART). The reliability of these results were assessed using internal statistical cross validation and well as external data validation. Unsupervised clustering generated very reliable and consistent partitions of the patient cohort into four computable phenotypic subgroups. These clusters were explicated by identifying specific salient clinical features included in the PRO-ACT archive that discriminate between the derived subcohorts. There are differences between alternative analytical methods in forecasting specific clinical phenotypes. Although predicting univariate clinical outcomes may be challenging, our results suggest that modern data science strategies are useful in clustering patients and generating evidence-based ALS hypotheses about complex interactions of multivariate factors. Predicting univariate clinical outcomes using the PRO-ACT data yields only marginal accuracy (about 70%). However, unsupervised clustering of participants into sub-groups generates stable, reliable and consistent (exceeding 95%) computable phenotypes whose explication requires interpretation of multivariate sets of features. HIGHLIGHTS: • Used a large ALS data archive of 8,000 patients consisting of 3 million records, including 200 clinical features tracked over 12 months. • Employed model-based and model-free methods to predict ALSFRS changes over time, cluster patients into cohorts, and derive computable phenotypes. • Research findings include stable, reliable, and consistent (95%) patient stratification into computable phenotypes. However, clinical explication of the results requires interpretation of multivariate information. Graphical Abstract ᅟ.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.