ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2023
The value of machine learning for prognosis prediction of diphenhydramine exposure: National analysis of 50,000 patients in the United States.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Intelligence-Based Hybrid CNN-GAT Framework Optimized by the Whale Optimization Algorithm for Clinical Lung Cancer Classification from Chest CT Images.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning for predicting medical outcomes associated with acute lithium poisoning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Predictive modeling of methadone poisoning outcomes in children ≤ 5 years: utilizing machine learning and the National Poison Data System for improved clinical decision-making.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Two Machine-learning Hybrid Models for Predicting Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Journal of medical signals and sensors · 2025Article
- Machine Learning-Based Prognostic Prediction Models in Calcium Channel Blockers Poisoning.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Prediction of naloxone dose in opioids toxicity based on machine learning techniques (artificial intelligence).Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2024Article
- Diphenhydramine Intoxication With Blood Extended Half-Life and a False Positive Result for Tricyclic Antidepressants.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diphenhydramine (DPH) is an antihistamine medication that in overdose can result in anticholinergic symptoms and serious complications, including arrhythmia and coma. We aimed to compare the value of various machine learning (ML) models, including light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), logistic regression (LR), and random forest (RF), in the outcome prediction of DPH poisoning. Materials and Methods: We used the National Poison Data System database and included all of the human exposures of DPH from January 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017, and excluded those cases with missing information, duplicated cases, and those who reported co-ingestion. Data were split into training and test datasets, and three ML models were compared. We developed confusion matrices for each, and standard performance metrics were calculated. Results: Our study population included 53,761 patients with DPH exposure. The most common reasons for exposure, outcome, chronicity of exposure, and formulation were captured. Our results showed that the average precision-recall area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84. LGBM and RF had the highest performance (average AUC of 0.91), followed by LR (average AUC of 0.90). The specificity of the models was 87.0% in the testing groups. The precision of models was 75.0%. Recall (sensitivity) of models ranged between 73% and 75% with an F1 score of 75.0%. The overall accuracy of LGBM, LR, and RF models in the test dataset was 74.8%, 74.0%, and 75.1%, respectively. In total, just 1.1% of patients (mostly those with major outcomes) received physostigmine. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates the application of ML in the prediction of DPH poisoning.
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.