ArticleViruses2023
Rapid Triage of Children with Suspected COVID-19 Using Laboratory-Based Machine-Learning Algorithms.
Article in Viruses, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Identifying Key Hematological and Biochemical Indicators of Disease Severity in COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- PAN-Immune inflammation value: a new biomarker for diagnosing appendicitis in children??BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Evaluating and Reducing Subgroup Disparity in AI Models: An Analysis of Pediatric COVID-19 Test Outcomes.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Diagnostic value of routine blood tests in differentiating between SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, and RSV infections in hospitalized children: a retrospective study.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- COVID-19 Pediatric Follow-Up: Respiratory Long COVID-Associated Comorbidities and Lung Ultrasound Alterations in a Cohort of Italian Children.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to limit the spread of the novel betacoronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), it is necessary to detect positive cases as soon as possible and isolate them. For this purpose, machine-learning algorithms, as a field of artificial intelligence, have been recognized as a promising tool. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of the most common machine-learning algorithms in the rapid triage of children with suspected COVID-19 using easily accessible and inexpensive laboratory parameters. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 566 children treated for respiratory diseases: 280 children with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and 286 children with respiratory symptoms who were SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative (control group). Six machine-learning algorithms, based on the blood laboratory data, were tested: random forest, support vector machine, linear discriminant analysis, artificial neural network, k-nearest neighbors, and decision tree. The training set was validated through stratified cross-validation, while the performance of each algorithm was confirmed by an independent test set. Random forest and support vector machine models demonstrated the highest accuracy of 85% and 82.1%, respectively. The models demonstrated better sensitivity than specificity and better negative predictive value than positive predictive value. The F1 score was higher for the random forest than for the support vector machine model, 85.2% and 82.3%, respectively. This study might have significant clinical applications, helping healthcare providers identify children with COVID-19 in the early stage, prior to PCR and/or antigen testing. Additionally, machine-learning algorithms could improve overall testing efficiency with no extra costs for the healthcare facility.
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.