ReviewArchives of pathology & laboratory medicine2023
Building the Model.
Review in Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Applications and challenges of biomarker-based predictive models in proactive health management.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Using Convolutional Neural Networks for the Classification of Suboptimal Chest Radiographs.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- A novel study to calculate immune-aging from peripheral blood T lymphocyte subsets and their mitochondrial parameters in healthy Chinese subjects.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Machine learning for predicting clinical outcomes of hospitalised children: a systematic review of applications in low- and middle-income countries.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Recent Developments in Pharmaceutical Spray Drying: Modeling, Process Optimization, and Emerging Trends with Machine Learning.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Implementing Machine Learning in the Clinical Laboratory: Opportunities and Challenges.EJIFCC · 2025Article
- Evaluating artificial intelligence-enabled medical tests in cardiology: Best practice.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2025Review
- Rigorous validation of machine learning in laboratory medicine: guidance toward quality improvement.Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences · 2025Review
- A Perspective on Artificial Intelligence for Molecular Pathologists.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2025Review
- Are we ready to integrate advanced artificial intelligence models in clinical laboratory?Biochemia medica · 2025Review
- A roadmap to implementing machine learning in healthcare: from concept to practice.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- A potential predictive model based on machine learning and CPD parameters in elderly patients with aplastic anemia and myelodysplastic neoplasms.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Image Synthesis in Nuclear Medicine Imaging with Deep Learning: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Decoding the neurotoxic effects of propofol: insights into the RARα-Snhg1-Bdnf regulatory cascade.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2024Article
- A predictive model for disease severity among COVID-19 elderly patients based on IgG subtypes and machine learning.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven systems engineering for next-generation plant-derived biopharmaceuticals.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CONTEXT.—: Machine learning (ML) allows for the analysis of massive quantities of high-dimensional clinical laboratory data, thereby revealing complex patterns and trends. Thus, ML can potentially improve the efficiency of clinical data interpretation and the practice of laboratory medicine. However, the risks of generating biased or unrepresentative models, which can lead to misleading clinical conclusions or overestimation of the model performance, should be recognized. OBJECTIVES.—: To discuss the major components for creating ML models, including data collection, data preprocessing, model development, and model evaluation. We also highlight many of the challenges and pitfalls in developing ML models, which could result in misleading clinical impressions or inaccurate model performance, and provide suggestions and guidance on how to circumvent these challenges. DATA SOURCES.—: The references for this review were identified through searches of the PubMed database, US Food and Drug Administration white papers and guidelines, conference abstracts, and online preprints. CONCLUSIONS.—: With the growing interest in developing and implementing ML models in clinical practice, laboratorians and clinicians need to be educated in order to collect sufficiently large and high-quality data, properly report the data set characteristics, and combine data from multiple institutions with proper normalization. They will also need to assess the reasons for missing values, determine the inclusion or exclusion of outliers, and evaluate the completeness of a data set. In addition, they require the necessary knowledge to select a suitable ML model for a specific clinical question and accurately evaluate the performance of the ML model, based on objective criteria. Domain-specific knowledge is critical in the entire workflow of developing ML models.
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.