Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36564710›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical research methodology2022

Machine learning-based techniques to improve lung transplantation outcomes and complications: a systematic review.

Marsa Gholamzadeh, Hamidreza Abtahi, Reza Safdari

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Machine Learning for 1-Year Mortality Prediction in Lung Transplant Recipients: ISHLT Registry.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025
    Article
  10. Understanding Machine Learning Applications in Lung Transplantation: A Narrative Review.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Artificial Intelligence Advances in Transplant Pathology.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marsa GholamzadehHealth Information Management Department, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 5th Floor, Fardanesh Alley, Qods Ave, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-6781-9342
Hamidreza AbtahiPulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Department, Thoracic Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-1111-0497
Reza SafdariHealth Information Management Department, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 5th Floor, Fardanesh Alley, Qods Ave, Tehran, Iran. rsafdari@tums.ac.ir.ORCID 0000-0002-4982-337X
Health Information Management · BEImam Khomeini Hospital · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine learning has been used to develop predictive models to support clinicians in making better and more reliable decisions. The high volume of collected data in the lung transplant process makes it possible to extract hidden patterns by applying machine learning methods. Our study aims to investigate the application of machine learning methods in lung transplantation.

methodA systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases from January 2000 to June 2022. Then, the title, abstracts, and full text of extracted articles were screened based on the PRISMA checklist. Then, eligible articles were selected according to inclusion criteria. The information regarding developed models was extracted from reviewed articles using a data extraction sheet.

resultsSearches yielded 414 citations. Of them, 136 studies were excluded after the title and abstract screening. Finally, 16 articles were determined as eligible studies that met our inclusion criteria. The objectives of eligible articles are classified into eight main categories. The applied machine learning methods include the Support vector machine (SVM) (n = 5, 31.25%) technique, logistic regression (n = 4, 25%), Random Forests (RF) (n = 4, 25%), Bayesian network (BN) (n = 3, 18.75%), linear regression (LR) (n = 3, 18.75%), Decision Tree (DT) (n = 3, 18.75%), neural networks (n = 3, 18.75%), Markov Model (n = 1, 6.25%), KNN (n = 1, 6.25%), K-means (n = 1, 6.25%), Gradient Boosting trees (XGBoost) (n = 1, 6.25%), and Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) (n = 1, 6.25%). Most studies (n = 11) employed more than one machine learning technique or combination of different techniques to make their models. The data obtained from pulmonary function tests were the most used as input variables in predictive model development. Most studies (n = 10) used only post-transplant patient information to develop their models. Also, UNOS was recognized as the most desirable data source in the reviewed articles. In most cases, clinicians succeeded to predict acute diseases incidence after lung transplantation (n = 4) or estimate survival rate (n = 4) by developing machine learning models.

conclusionThe outcomes of these developed prediction models could aid clinicians to make better and more reliable decisions by extracting new knowledge from the huge volume of lung transplantation data.

Indexed as

Lung TransplantationMachine LearningBayes TheoremHumansNeural Networks, ComputerSurvival RateLung diseasesLung transplantationMachine learningReview

Identifiers

PMID36564710
PMCPMC9784000
OpenAlexW4312178962

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.