ArticleScientific reports2022
Forecasting medical state transition using machine learning methods.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal machine learning framework for diabetic foot ulcer healing trajectory prediction.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Article
- Prognosis prediction in traumatic brain injury patients using machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Subgroup State Prediction under Different Noise Levels Using MODWT and XGBoost.Journal of healthcare engineering · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early circulatory failure detection is an effective way to reduce medical fatigue and improve state pre-warning ability. Instead of using 0-1 original state, a transformed state is proposed in this research, which reflects how the state is transformed. The performance of the proposed method is compared with the original method under three models, including logistic regression, AdaBoost and XGBoost. The results show that the model XGBoost generally has the best performance measured by AUC, F1 and Sensitivity with values around 0.93, 0.91 and 0.90, at the prediction gaps 5, 10 and 20 separately. Under the model XGBoost, the method with transformed response variable has significantly better performance than that with the original response variable, with the performance metrics being around 1% to 4% higher, and the t values are all significant under the level 0.01. In order to explore the model performance under different baseline information, a subgroup analysis is conducted under sex, age, weight and height. The results demonstrate that sex and age have more significant influence on the model performance especially at the higher gaps than weight and height.
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.