ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2021
Performance evaluation of selected machine learning algorithms for COVID-19 prediction using routine clinical data: With versus Without CT scan features.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel COVID-19 Diagnosis Approach Utilizing a Comprehensive Set of Diagnostic Information (CSDI).Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGiven coronavirus disease (COVID-19's) unknown nature, diagnosis, and treatment is very complex up to the present time. Thus, it is essential to have a framework for an early prediction of the disease. In this regard, machines learning (ML) could be crucial to extract concealed patterns from mining of huge raw datasets then it establishes high-quality predictive models. At this juncture, we aimed to apply different ML techniques to develop clinical predictive models and select the best performance of them. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe dataset of Ayatollah Talleghani hospital, COVID-19 focal center affiliated to Abadan University of Medical Sciences have been taken into consideration. The dataset used in this study consists of 501 case records with two classes (COVID-19 and non COVID-19) and 32 columns for the diagnostic features. ML algorithms such as Naïve Bayesian, Bayesian Net, random forest (RF), multilayer perceptron, K-star, C4.5, and support vector machine were developed. Then, the recital of selected ML models was assessed by the comparison of some performance indices such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, F-score, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC).
resultsThe experimental results indicate that RF algorithm with the accuracy of 92.42%, specificity of 75.70%, precision of 92.30%, sensitivity of 92.40%, F-measure of 92.00%, and ROC of 97.15% has the best capability for COVID-19 diagnosis and screening.
conclusionThe empirical results reveal that RF model yielded higher performance as compared to other six classification models. It is promising to the implementation of RF model in the health-care settings to increase the accuracy and speed of disease diagnosis for primary prevention, screening, surveillance, and early treatment.
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.