Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38045479›Full record

ArticleArXiv2023

Quantifying Impairment and Disease Severity Using AI Models Trained on Healthy Subjects.

Boyang Yu, Aakash Kaku, Kangning Liu, Avinash Parnandi, Emily Fokas, Anita Venkatesan, Natasha Pandit, Rajesh Ranganath, Heidi Schambra, Carlos Fernandez-Granda

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Boyang Yu
Aakash Kaku
Kangning Liu
Avinash Parnandi
Emily Fokas
Anita Venkatesan
Natasha Pandit
Rajesh Ranganath
Heidi Schambra
Carlos Fernandez-Granda

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automatic assessment of impairment and disease severity is a key challenge in data-driven medicine. We propose a novel framework to address this challenge, which leverages AI models trained exclusively on healthy individuals. The COnfidence-Based chaRacterization of Anomalies (COBRA) score exploits the decrease in confidence of these models when presented with impaired or diseased patients to quantify their deviation from the healthy population. We applied the COBRA score to address a key limitation of current clinical evaluation of upper-body impairment in stroke patients. The gold-standard Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) requires in-person administration by a trained assessor for 30-45 minutes, which restricts monitoring frequency and precludes physicians from adapting rehabilitation protocols to the progress of each patient. The COBRA score, computed automatically in under one minute, is shown to be strongly correlated with the FMA on an independent test cohort for two different data modalities: wearable sensors ($\rho = 0.845$, 95% CI [0.743,0.908]) and video ($\rho = 0.746$, 95% C.I [0.594, 0.847]). To demonstrate the generalizability of the approach to other conditions, the COBRA score was also applied to quantify severity of knee osteoarthritis from magnetic-resonance imaging scans, again achieving significant correlation with an independent clinical assessment ($\rho = 0.644$, 95% C.I [0.585,0.696]).

Identifiers

PMID38045479
PMCPMC10690300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.