ArticleScientific reports2023
Improving the performance of machine learning algorithms for health outcomes predictions in multicentric cohorts.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global performance of machine learning models to predict all-cause mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence for Amazonian health: validation is the price of entry.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- The Effectiveness of Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Healthcare Service Quality Metrics: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Artificial Intelligence-Driven Risk Stratification in Patients With Diabetic Kidney Disease in the US Veterans Population.Kidney medicine · 2026Article
- Predictive divergence in machine learning models for clinical mortality risk: A multicohort study of covid-19 patients.PloS one · 2026Article
- Prediction of long-term recurrence-free and overall survival in early-onset colorectal cancer: the ENCORE multi-centre study.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Liquid biopsy to identify Barrett's oesophagus, dysplasia and oesophageal adenocarcinoma: theGut · 2025Article
- Multicenter comparative analysis of local and aggregated data training strategies in COVID-19 outcome prediction with Machine learning.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Efficient clinical decision-making process via AI-based multimodal data fusion: A COVID-19 case study.Heliyon · 2024Article
- ClotCatcher: a novel natural language model to accurately adjudicate venous thromboembolism from radiology reports.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Machine learning algorithms are being increasingly used in healthcare settings but their generalizability between different regions is still unknown. This study aims to identify the strategy that maximizes the predictive performance of identifying the risk of death by COVID-19 in different regions of a large and unequal country. This is a multicenter cohort study with data collected from patients with a positive RT-PCR test for COVID-19 from March to August 2020 (n = 8477) in 18 hospitals, covering all five Brazilian regions. Of all patients with a positive RT-PCR test during the period, 2356 (28%) died. Eight different strategies were used for training and evaluating the performance of three popular machine learning algorithms (extreme gradient boosting, lightGBM, and catboost). The strategies ranged from only using training data from a single hospital, up to aggregating patients by their geographic regions. The predictive performance of the algorithms was evaluated by the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) on the test set of each hospital. We found that the best overall predictive performances were obtained when using training data from the same hospital, which was the winning strategy for 11 (61%) of the 18 participating hospitals. In this study, the use of more patient data from other regions slightly decreased predictive performance. However, models trained in other hospitals still had acceptable performances and could be a solution while data for a specific hospital is being collected.
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.