Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38273386›Full record

ArticleBioData mining2024

Antibody selection strategies and their impact in predicting clinical malaria based on multi-sera data.

André Fonseca, Mikolaj Spytek, Przemysław Biecek, Clara Cordeiro, Nuno Sepúlveda

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioData mining, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

André FonsecaFCT - Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade do Algarve, Faro, Portugal.
Mikolaj SpytekFaculty of Mathematics & Information Science, Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland.
Przemysław BiecekFaculty of Mathematics & Information Science, Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland.
Clara CordeiroFCT - Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade do Algarve, Faro, Portugal.
Nuno SepúlvedaCEAUL - Centro de Estatística e Aplicações da Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. nuno.sepulveda@pw.edu.pl.
University of Lisbon · PTWarsaw University of Technology · PLUniversity of Algarve · PT

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia SFRH/BD/147629/2019Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia UIDB/00006/2020Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange PPN/ULM/2020/1/00069/U/00001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNowadays, the chance of discovering the best antibody candidates for predicting clinical malaria has notably increased due to the availability of multi-sera data. The analysis of these data is typically divided into a feature selection phase followed by a predictive one where several models are constructed for predicting the outcome of interest. A key question in the analysis is to determine which antibodies  should be included in the predictive stage and whether they should be included in the original or a transformed scale (i.e. binary/dichotomized).

methodsTo answer this question, we developed three approaches for antibody selection in the context of predicting clinical malaria: (i) a basic and simple approach based on selecting antibodies via the nonparametric Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test; (ii) an optimal dychotomizationdichotomization approach where each antibody was selected according to the optimal cut-off via maximization of the chi-squared (χ

resultsOur results led to almost similar areas under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curves of 0.72 (95% CI = [0.62, 0.82]), 0.80 (95% CI = [0.71, 0.89]), 0.79 (95% CI = [0.7, 0.88]) for the simple, dichotomization and hybrid approaches, respectively. These approaches were based on 6, 20, and 16 antibodies, respectively.

conclusionsThe three feature selection strategies provided a better predictive performance of the outcome when compared to the previous results relying on Random Forest including all the 36 antibodies (AUC = 0.68, 95% CI = [0.57;0.79]). Given the similar predictive performance, we recommended that the three strategies should be used in conjunction in the same data set and selected according to their complexity.

Indexed as

Malaria outcome predictionMultivariate Serological DataRandom forestStatistical modellingSuper Learner

Identifiers

PMID38273386
PMCPMC10811867
OpenAlexW4391231896

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.