Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32199461›Full record

ArticleBMC neurology2020

Machine learning analysis of motor evoked potential time series to predict disability progression in multiple sclerosis.

Jan Yperman, Thijs Becker, Dirk Valkenborg, Veronica Popescu, Niels Hellings, Bart Van Wijmeersch, Liesbet M Peeters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Artificial Intelligence and Multiple Sclerosis.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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.

Jan YpermanTheoretical Physics, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium. jan_yperman@uhasselt.be.
Thijs BeckerI-Biostat, Data Science Institute, Hasselt University,, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Dirk ValkenborgI-Biostat, Data Science Institute, Hasselt University,, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Veronica PopescuRehabilitation and MS-Center, Pelt, 3900, Belgium.
Niels HellingsDepartment of Immunology, Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, 3590, Belgium.
Bart Van WijmeerschRehabilitation and MS-Center, Pelt, 3900, Belgium.
Liesbet M PeetersI-Biostat, Data Science Institute, Hasselt University,, Diepenbeek, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvoked potentials (EPs) are a measure of the conductivity of the central nervous system. They are used to monitor disease progression of multiple sclerosis patients. Previous studies only extracted a few variables from the EPs, which are often further condensed into a single variable: the EP score. We perform a machine learning analysis of motor EP that uses the whole time series, instead of a few variables, to predict disability progression after two years. Obtaining realistic performance estimates of this task has been difficult because of small data set sizes. We recently extracted a dataset of EPs from the Rehabiliation & MS Center in Overpelt, Belgium. Our data set is large enough to obtain, for the first time, a performance estimate on an independent test set containing different patients.

methodsWe extracted a large number of time series features from the motor EPs with the highly comparative time series analysis software package. Mutual information with the target and the Boruta method are used to find features which contain information not included in the features studied in the literature. We use random forests (RF) and logistic regression (LR) classifiers to predict disability progression after two years. Statistical significance of the performance increase when adding extra features is checked.

resultsIncluding extra time series features in motor EPs leads to a statistically significant improvement compared to using only the known features, although the effect is limited in magnitude (ΔAUC = 0.02 for RF and ΔAUC = 0.05 for LR). RF with extra time series features obtains the best performance (AUC = 0.75±0.07 (mean and standard deviation)), which is good considering the limited number of biomarkers in the model. RF (a nonlinear classifier) outperforms LR (a linear classifier).

conclusionsUsing machine learning methods on EPs shows promising predictive performance. Using additional EP time series features beyond those already in use leads to a modest increase in performance. Larger datasets, preferably multi-center, are needed for further research. Given a large enough dataset, these models may be used to support clinicians in their decision making process regarding future treatment.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationDisease ProgressionMachine LearningBelgiumDatasets as TopicEvoked Potentials, MotorFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMultiple SclerosisDisease prognosisEvoked potentialsFeature extractionMachine learningMultiple sclerosis

Identifiers

PMID32199461
PMCPMC7085864

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.