ReviewJournal of healthcare engineering2021
An Overview of Supervised Machine Learning Methods and Data Analysis for COVID-19 Detection.
Review in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of alkaline phosphatase as a putative biomarker of anti-NGF treatment-associated arthropathies: Machine learning-assisted analyses of clinical trial data.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based characterization of neutrophil activation phenotypes inComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- A Novel Image Processing Method for Obtaining an Accurate Three-Dimensional Profile of Red Blood Cells in Digital Holographic Microscopy.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Survey of COVID-19 Diagnosis Using Routine Blood Tests with the Aid of Artificial Intelligence Techniques.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A Social Network Analysis Approach to Evaluate the Relationship Between the Mobility Network Metrics and the COVID-19 Outbreak.Health services insights · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methods: Our analysis and machine learning algorithm is based on most cited two clinical datasets from the literature: one from San Raffaele Hospital Milan Italia and the other from Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein São Paulo Brasilia. The datasets were processed to select the best features that most influence the target, and it turned out that almost all of them are blood parameters. EDA (Exploratory Data Analysis) methods were applied to the datasets, and a comparative study of supervised machine learning models was done, after which the support vector machine (SVM) was selected as the one with the best performance. Results: SVM being the best performant is used as our proposed supervised machine learning algorithm. An accuracy of 99.29%, sensitivity of 92.79%, and specificity of 100% were obtained with the dataset from Kaggle (https://www.kaggle.com/einsteindata4u/covid19) after applying optimization to SVM. The same procedure and work were performed with the dataset taken from San Raffaele Hospital (https://zenodo.org/record/3886927#.YIluB5AzbMV). Once more, the SVM presented the best performance among other machine learning algorithms, and 92.86%, 93.55%, and 90.91% for accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, respectively, were obtained. Conclusion: The obtained results, when compared with others from the literature based on these same datasets, are superior, leading us to conclude that our proposed solution is reliable for the COVID-19 diagnosis.
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.