ArticlePloS one2022
Fast and automated biomarker detection in breath samples with machine learning.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intelligent Discrimination of Grain Aging Using Volatile Organic Compound Fingerprints and Machine Learning: A Comprehensive Review.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- From Volume to Mass: Transforming Volatile Organic Compound Detection with Photoionization Detectors and Machine Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Harnessing serum VOCs and machine learning for the early detection of MAFLD.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Early Diagnosis: End-to-End CNN-LSTM Models for Mass Spectrometry Data Classification.Analytical chemistry · 2023Article
- Analysis of Primary Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry Data by Neural Networks for Plant Samples Classification.Metabolites · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in human breath can reveal a large spectrum of health conditions and can be used for fast, accurate and non-invasive diagnostics. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) is used to measure VOCs, but its application is limited by expert-driven data analysis that is time-consuming, subjective and may introduce errors. We propose a machine learning-based system to perform GC-MS data analysis that exploits deep learning pattern recognition ability to learn and automatically detect VOCs directly from raw data, thus bypassing expert-led processing. We evaluate this new approach on clinical samples and with four types of convolutional neural networks (CNNs): VGG16, VGG-like, densely connected and residual CNNs. The proposed machine learning methods showed to outperform the expert-led analysis by detecting a significantly higher number of VOCs in just a fraction of time while maintaining high specificity. These results suggest that the proposed novel approach can help the large-scale deployment of breath-based diagnosis by reducing time and cost, and increasing accuracy and consistency.
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.