ArticlePloS one2020
Prediction of hepatitis E using machine learning models.
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 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine Learning Used in Communicable Disease Control: A Scoping Review.Public health reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Dynamic evaluation system for improving hospital outsourcing service performance: a G1-Critic and LSTM+Dropout approach.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- [Diagnosis and treatment of liver diseases in the era of artificial intelligence].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025Review
- Identification and validation of PANoptosis-related biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease via single-cell RNA sequencing and machine learning.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- An optimization protocol for MRI examination resource allocation based on demand forecasting and linear programming.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diversity of Hepatitis E Viruses in Rats in Yunnan Province and the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region of China.Viruses · 2025Article
- Multi-region infectious disease prediction modeling based on spatio-temporal graph neural network and the dynamic model.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Meteorological determinants of hepatitis E dynamics in Jiangsu Province, China: a pre-COVID-19 era study focusing on multi-route transmission (2005-2018).Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Harnessing artificial intelligence for enhanced public health surveillance: a narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Assessing the potential for application of machine learning in predicting weather-sensitive waterborne diseases in selected districts of Tanzania.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Deep learning models for hepatitis E incidence prediction leveraging Baidu index.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Hepatitis E virus infections.World journal of virology · 2024Article
- Deep evolutionary fusion neural network: a new prediction standard for infectious disease incidence rates.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- CAT-CBAM-Net: An Automatic Scoring Method for Sow Body Condition Based on CNN and Transformer.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Deep learning models for hepatitis E incidence prediction leveraging meteorological factors.PloS one · 2023Article
- Predicting incidence of hepatitis E using machine learning in Jiangsu Province, China.Epidemiology and infection · 2022Article
- Deep learning time series prediction models in surveillance data of hepatitis incidence in China.PloS one · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate and reliable predictions of infectious disease can be valuable to public health organizations that plan interventions to decrease or prevent disease transmission. A great variety of models have been developed for this task. However, for different data series, the performance of these models varies. Hepatitis E, as an acute liver disease, has been a major public health problem. Which model is more appropriate for predicting the incidence of hepatitis E? In this paper, three different methods are used and the performance of the three methods is compared.
methodsAutoregressive integrated moving average(ARIMA), support vector machine(SVM) and long short-term memory(LSTM) recurrent neural network were adopted and compared. ARIMA was implemented by python with the help of statsmodels. SVM was accomplished by matlab with libSVM library. LSTM was designed by ourselves with Keras, a deep learning library. To tackle the problem of overfitting caused by limited training samples, we adopted dropout and regularization strategies in our LSTM model. Experimental data were obtained from the monthly incidence and cases number of hepatitis E from January 2005 to December 2017 in Shandong province, China. We selected data from July 2015 to December 2017 to validate the models, and the rest was taken as training set. Three metrics were applied to compare the performance of models, including root mean square error(RMSE), mean absolute percentage error(MAPE) and mean absolute error(MAE).
resultsBy analyzing data, we took ARIMA(1, 1, 1), ARIMA(3, 1, 2) as monthly incidence prediction model and cases number prediction model, respectively. Cross-validation and grid search were used to optimize parameters of SVM. Penalty coefficient C and kernel function parameter g were set 8, 0.125 for incidence prediction, and 22, 0.01 for cases number prediction. LSTM has 4 nodes. Dropout and L2 regularization parameters were set 0.15, 0.001, respectively. By the metrics of RMSE, we obtained 0.022, 0.0204, 0.01 for incidence prediction, using ARIMA, SVM and LSTM. And we obtained 22.25, 20.0368, 11.75 for cases number prediction, using three models. For MAPE metrics, the results were 23.5%, 21.7%, 15.08%, and 23.6%, 21.44%, 13.6%, for incidence prediction and cases number prediction, respectively. For MAE metrics, the results were 0.018, 0.0167, 0.011 and 18.003, 16.5815, 9.984, for incidence prediction and cases number prediction, respectively.
conclusionsComparing ARIMA, SVM and LSTM, we found that nonlinear models(SVM, LSTM) outperform linear models(ARIMA). LSTM obtained the best performance in all three metrics of RSME, MAPE, MAE. Hence, LSTM is the most suitable for predicting hepatitis E monthly incidence and cases number.
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.