ArticleMedicine2018
Machine learning methods for automatic pain assessment using facial expression information: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- The future of psychopharmacology: a critical appraisal of ongoing phase 2/3 trials, and of some current trends aiming to de-risk trial programmes of novel agents.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2023Article
- Novel Method for Three-Dimensional Facial Expression Recognition Using Self-Normalizing Neural Networks and Mobile Devices.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPrediction of pain using machine learning algorithms is an emerging field in both computer science and clinical medicine. Several machine algorithms were developed and validated in recent years. However, the majority of studies in this topic was published on bioinformatics or computer science journals instead of medical journals. This tendency and preference led to a gap of knowledge and acknowledgment between computer scientists who invent the algorithm and medical researchers who may use the algorithms in practice. As a consequence, some of these prediction papers did not discuss the clinical utility aspects and were causally reported without following related professional guidelines (e.g., TRIPOD statement). The aim of this protocol is to systematically summarize the current evidences about performance and utility of different machine learning methods used for automatic pain assessments based on human facial expression. In addition, this study is aimed to demonstrate and fill the knowledge gap to promote interdisciplinary collaboration. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search all English language literature in the following electronic databases: PubMed, Web of Science and IEEE Xplore. A systematic review and meta-analysis summarizing the accuracy, interpretability, generalizability, and computational efficiency of machine learning methods will be conducted. Subgroup analyses by machine learning method types will be conducted. TIMELINE: The formal meta-analysis will start on Jan 15, 2019 and expected to finish by April 15, 2019. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval will be exempted or will not be required because the data collected and analyzed in this meta-analysis will not be on an individual level. The results will be disseminated in the form of an official publication in a peer-reviewed journal and/or presentation at relevant conferences. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018103059.
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.