Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34504228›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Automated machine learning for endemic active tuberculosis prediction from multiplex serological data.

Hooman H Rashidi, Luke T Dang, Samer Albahra, Resmi Ravindran, Imran H Khan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Hooman H RashidiDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis, 4400 V Street, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA. hrashidi@ucdavis.edu.
Luke T DangDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis, 4400 V Street, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA.
Samer AlbahraDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis, 4400 V Street, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA.
Resmi RavindranDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis, 4400 V Street, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA.
Imran H KhanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis, 4400 V Street, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA. ihkhan@ucdavis.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Serological diagnosis of active tuberculosis (TB) is enhanced by detection of multiple antibodies due to variable immune responses among patients. Clinical interpretation of these complex datasets requires development of suitable algorithms, a time consuming and tedious undertaking addressed by the automated machine learning platform MILO (Machine Intelligence Learning Optimizer). MILO seamlessly integrates data processing, feature selection, model training, and model validation to simultaneously generate and evaluate thousands of models. These models were then further tested for generalizability on out-of-sample secondary and tertiary datasets. Out of 31 antigens evaluated, a 23-antigen model was the most robust on both the secondary dataset (TB vs healthy) and the tertiary dataset (TB vs COPD) with sensitivity of 90.5% and respective specificities of 100.0% and 74.6%. MILO represents a user-friendly, end-to-end solution for automated generation and deployment of optimized models, ideal for applications where rapid clinical implementation is critical such as emerging infectious diseases.

Indexed as

Machine LearningModels, TheoreticalAdultFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTuberculosisYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34504228
PMCPMC8429671

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.