Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33289013›Full record

ArticleIntelligence-based medicine2020

Outlier-SMOTE: A refined oversampling technique for improved detection of COVID-19.

Venkata Pavan Kumar Turlapati, Manas Ranjan Prusty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Intelligence-based medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  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

2 authors.

Venkata Pavan Kumar TurlapatiSchool of Computing, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Kattankulathur, 603203, India.
Manas Ranjan PrustyCentre for Cyber Physical Systems, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, 600127, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Almost every dataset these days continually faces the predicament of class imbalance. It is difficult to train classifiers on these types of data as they become biased towards a set of classes, hence leading to reduction in classifier performance. This setback is often tackled by the use of various over-sampling or under-sampling algorithms. But, the method which stood out of all the numerous algorithms was the Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique (SMOTE). SMOTE generates synthetic samples of the minority class by oversampling each data-point by considering linear combinations of existing minority class neighbors. Each minority data sample generates an equal number of synthetic data. As the world is suffering from the plight of COVID-19 pandemic, the authors applied the idea to help boost the classifying performance whilst detecting this deadly virus. This paper presents a modified version of SMOTE known as Outlier-SMOTE wherein each data-point is oversampled with respect to its distance from other data-points. The data-point which is farther than the other data-points is given greater importance and is oversampled more than its counterparts. Outlier-SMOTE reduces the chances of overlapping of minority data samples which often occurs in the traditional SMOTE algorithm. This method is tested on five benchmark datasets and is eventually tested on a COVID-19 dataset. F-measure, Recall and Precision are used as principle metrics to evaluate the performance of the classifier as is the case for any class imbalanced data set. The proposed algorithm performs considerably better than the traditional SMOTE algorithm for the considered datasets.

Indexed as

ClassificationCOVID-19Imbalanced datasetOver-samplingSMOTE

Identifiers

PMID33289013
PMCPMC7710484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.