Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34465179›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of biomedical data science2021

Probabilistic Machine Learning for Healthcare.

Irene Y Chen, Shalmali Joshi, Marzyeh Ghassemi, Rajesh Ranganath

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of biomedical data science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Diabetic Foot Ulcer Identification: A Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Machine learning in patient flow: a review.Progress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England) · 2021
    Review
  17. 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.

Irene Y ChenDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA; email: iychen@mit.edu.
Shalmali JoshiVector Institute, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1M1, Canada; email: shalmali@vectorinstitute.ai.
Marzyeh GhassemiVector Institute, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1M1, Canada; email: shalmali@vectorinstitute.ai.
Rajesh RanganathDepartment of Computer Science, Courant Institute, New York University, New York, NY 10012, USA.

Funding

Deep probabilistic predictive models for stroke and coronary heart diseaseR01HL148248 · NHLBI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI RANGANATH, RAJESH · 2019 to 2023
$3.3M
Critical Care InformaticsR56EB017205 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI CELI, LEO ANTHONY G, GHASSEMI, MARZYEH · 2018 to 2023
$783k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL148248NIBIB NIH HHS R56 EB017205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning can be used to make sense of healthcare data. Probabilistic machine learning models help provide a complete picture of observed data in healthcare. In this review, we examine how probabilistic machine learning can advance healthcare. We consider challenges in the predictive model building pipeline where probabilistic models can be beneficial, including calibration and missing data. Beyond predictive models, we also investigate the utility of probabilistic machine learning models in phenotyping, in generative models for clinical use cases, and in reinforcement learning.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareMachine LearningHealth FacilitiesModels, Statisticalartificial intelligenceelectronic health recordshealthmachine learningprobabilistic modeling

Identifiers

PMID34465179
PMCPMC13234866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.