Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35893436›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Prediction of Influenza Complications: Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Prediction Model to Improve and Expand the Identification of Vaccine-Hesitant Patients at Risk of Severe Influenza Complications.

Donna M Wolk, Alon Lanyado, Ann Marie Tice, Maheen Shermohammed, Yaron Kinar, Amir Goren, Christopher F Chabris, Michelle N Meyer, Avi Shoshan, Vida Abedi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Donna M WolkDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Diagnostic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA 17822, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2828-5135
Alon LanyadoMedial EarlySign, 6 Hangar Road, Hod Hasharon 4527703, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-2159-4659
Ann Marie TiceDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Diagnostic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA 17822, USA.
Maheen ShermohammedBehavioral Insights Team, Steele Institute for Health Innovation, Geisinger, Danville, PA 17822, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4780-7325
Yaron KinarMedial EarlySign, 6 Hangar Road, Hod Hasharon 4527703, Israel.
Amir GorenBehavioral Insights Team, Steele Institute for Health Innovation, Geisinger, Danville, PA 17822, USA.
Christopher F ChabrisBehavioral Insights Team, Steele Institute for Health Innovation, Geisinger, Danville, PA 17822, USA.
Michelle N MeyerBehavioral Insights Team, Steele Institute for Health Innovation, Geisinger, Danville, PA 17822, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5497-8803
Avi ShoshanMedial EarlySign, 6 Hangar Road, Hod Hasharon 4527703, Israel.
Vida AbediDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA 17033, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7689-933X
Roche (Israel) · ILGeisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine · USPennsylvania State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Influenza vaccinations are recommended for high-risk individuals, but few population-based strategies exist to identify individual risks. Patient-level data from unvaccinated individuals, stratified into retrospective cases (n = 111,022) and controls (n = 2,207,714), informed a machine learning model designed to create an influenza risk score; the model was called the Geisinger Flu-Complications Flag (GFlu-CxFlag). The flag was created and validated on a cohort of 604,389 unique individuals. Risk scores were generated for influenza cases; the complication rate for individuals without influenza was estimated to adjust for unrelated complications. Shapley values were used to examine the model’s correctness and demonstrate its dependence on different features. Bias was assessed for race and sex. Inverse propensity weighting was used in the derivation stage to correct for biases. The GFlu-CxFlag model was compared to the pre-existing Medial EarlySign Flu Algomarker and existing risk guidelines that describe high-risk patients who would benefit from influenza vaccination. The GFlu-CxFlag outperformed other traditional risk-based models; the area under curve (AUC) was 0.786 [0.783−0.789], compared with 0.694 [0.690−0.698] (p-value < 0.00001). The presence of acute and chronic respiratory diseases, age, and previous emergency department visits contributed most to the GFlu-CxFlag model’s prediction. When higher numerical scores were assigned to more severe complications, the GFlu-CxFlag AUC increased to 0.828 [0.823−0.833], with excellent discrimination in the final model used to perform the risk stratification of the population. The GFlu-CxFlag can better identify high-risk individuals than existing models based on vaccination guidelines, thus creating a population-based risk stratification for individual risk assessment and deployment in vaccine hesitancy reduction programs in our health system.

Indexed as

Clinical Lab 2.0decision supportEHRelectronic medical recordsinfluenzamachine learningprecision medicinerisk stratificationRT-PCRvaccine

Identifiers

PMID35893436
PMCPMC9332321
OpenAlexW4288042379

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.