Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32433694›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Artificial intelligence may offer insight into factors determining individual TSH level.

Prasanna Santhanam, Tanmay Nath, Faiz Khan Mohammad, Rexford S Ahima

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Prasanna SanthanamDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetes, & Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4822-2705
Tanmay NathDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2092-7159
Faiz Khan MohammadDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, India.
Rexford S AhimaDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetes, & Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Johns Hopkins University · USIndian Institute of Technology Madras · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The factors that determine Serum Thyrotropin (TSH) levels have been examined through different methods, using different covariates. However, the use of machine learning methods has so far not been studied in population databases like NHANES (National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey) to predict TSH. In this study, we performed a comparative analysis of different machine learning methods like Linear regression, Random forest, Support vector machine, multilayer perceptron and stacking regression to predict TSH and classify individuals with normal, low and high TSH levels. We considered Free T4, Anti-TPO antibodies, T3, Body Mass Index (BMI), Age and Ethnicity as the predictor variables. A total of 9818 subjects were included in this comparative analysis. We used coefficient of determination (r2) value to compare the results for predicting the TSH and show that the Random Forest, Gradient Boosting and Stacking Regression perform equally well in predicting TSH and achieve the highest r2 value = 0.13, with mean absolute error of 0.78. Moreover, we found that Anti-TPO is the most important feature in predicting TSH followed by Age, BMI, T3 and Free-T4 for the regression analysis. While classifying TSH into normal, high or low levels, our comparative analysis also shows that Random forest performs the best in the classification study, performed with individuals with normal, high and low levels of TSH. We found the following Areas Under Curve (AUC); for low TSH, AUC = 0.61, normal TSH, AUC = 0.61 and elevated TSH AUC = 0.69. Additionally, we found that Anti-TPO was the most important feature in classifying TSH. In this study, we suggest that artificial intelligence and machine learning methods might offer an insight into the complex hypothalamic-pituitary -thyroid axis and may be an invaluable tool that guides us in making appropriate therapeutic decisions (thyroid hormone dosing) for the individual patient.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAge FactorsBody Mass IndexEthnicityFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleRetrospective StudiesThyrotropinThyroxineTriiodothyronineThyrotropinThyroxineTriiodothyronine

Identifiers

PMID32433694
PMCPMC7239447
OpenAlexW3027760840

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.