Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32343256›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Artificial Intelligence-Based Differential Diagnosis: Development and Validation of a Probabilistic Model to Address Lack of Large-Scale Clinical Datasets.

Shahrukh Chishti, Karan Raj Jaggi, Anuj Saini, Gaurav Agarwal, Ashish Ranjan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Shahrukh Chishti1mg Technologies Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon, India.ORCID 0000-0002-6014-1433
Karan Raj Jaggi1mg Technologies Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon, India.ORCID 0000-0002-2179-3543
Anuj Saini1mg Technologies Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon, India.ORCID 0000-0001-9133-7802
Gaurav Agarwal1mg Technologies Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon, India.ORCID 0000-0002-5247-2507
Ashish Ranjan1mg Technologies Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon, India.ORCID 0000-0002-9340-1940

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine-learning or deep-learning algorithms for clinical diagnosis are inherently dependent on the availability of large-scale clinical datasets. Lack of such datasets and inherent problems such as overfitting often necessitate the development of innovative solutions. Probabilistic modeling closely mimics the rationale behind clinical diagnosis and represents a unique solution.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and validate a probabilistic model for differential diagnosis in different medical domains.

methodsNumerical values of symptom-disease associations were utilized to mathematically represent medical domain knowledge. These values served as the core engine for the probabilistic model. For the given set of symptoms, the model was utilized to produce a ranked list of differential diagnoses, which was compared to the differential diagnosis constructed by a physician in a consult. Practicing medical specialists were integral in the development and validation of this model. Clinical vignettes (patient case studies) were utilized to compare the accuracy of doctors and the model against the assumed gold standard. The accuracy analysis was carried out over the following metrics: top 3 accuracy, precision, and recall.

resultsThe model demonstrated a statistically significant improvement (P=.002) in diagnostic accuracy (85%) as compared to the doctors' performance (67%). This advantage was retained across all three categories of clinical vignettes: 100% vs 82% (P<.001) for highly specific disease presentation, 83% vs 65% for moderately specific disease presentation (P=.005), and 72% vs 49% (P<.001) for nonspecific disease presentation. The model performed slightly better than the doctors' average in precision (62% vs 60%, P=.43) but there was no improvement with respect to recall (53% vs 56%, P=.27). However, neither difference was statistically significant.

conclusionsThe present study demonstrates a drastic improvement over previously reported results that can be attributed to the development of a stable probabilistic framework utilizing symptom-disease associations to mathematically represent medical domain knowledge. The current iteration relies on static, manually curated values for calculating the degree of association. Shifting to real-world data-derived values represents the next step in model development.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDiagnosis, DifferentialModels, StatisticalArtificial IntelligenceHumansartificial intelligenceBayesian modelmachine learningmedical diagnosisprobabilistic modeling

Identifiers

PMID32343256
PMCPMC7218591

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.