Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38357491›Full record

ReviewHealth science reports2024

The effect of machine learning algorithms in the prediction, and diagnosis of meningitis: A systematic review.

Kosar Ghaddaripouri, Maryam Ghaddaripouri, Atefeh Sadat Mousavi, Seyyedeh Fatemeh Mousavi Baigi, Masoumeh Rezaei Sarsari, Fatemeh Dahmardeh Kemmak, Mohammad Reza Mazaheri Habibi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kosar GhaddaripouriDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences Shiraz University of Medical Sciences Shiraz Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-5817-9945
Maryam GhaddaripouriDepartment of Laboratory Sciences, School of Paramedical and Rehabilitation Sciences Mashhad University of Medical Sciences Mashhad Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-3695-3527
Atefeh Sadat MousaviMashhad University of Medical Sciences Mashhad Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-1457-7586
Seyyedeh Fatemeh Mousavi BaigiMashhad University of Medical Sciences Mashhad Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2214-0077
Masoumeh Rezaei SarsariDepartment of Health Information Technology Tehran University of Medical Sciences Tehran Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5396-0602
Fatemeh Dahmardeh KemmakMashhad University of Medical Sciences Mashhad Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6975-0940
Mohammad Reza Mazaheri HabibiDepartment of Health Information Technology Varastegan Institute for Medical Sciences Mashhad Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8096-2530
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences · IRShiraz University of Medical Sciences · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: This systematic review aimed to evaluating the effectiveness of machine learning (ML) algorithms for the prediction and diagnosis of meningitis. Methods: On November 12, 2022, a systematic review was carried out using a keyword search in the reliable scientific databases PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science. The recommendations of Preferred Reporting for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) were adhered to. Studies conducted in English that employed ML to predict and identify meningitis were deemed to match the inclusion criteria. The eligibility requirements were used to independently review the titles and abstracts. The whole text was then obtained and independently reviewed in accordance with the eligibility requirements. Results: After all the research matched the inclusion criteria, a total of 16 studies were added to the systematic review. Studies on the application of ML algorithms in the three categories of disease diagnosis ability (8.16) and disease prediction ability (8.16) (including cases related to identifying patients (50%), risk of death in patients (25%), the consequences of the disease in childhood (12.5%), and its etiology [12.5%]) were placed. Among the ML algorithms used in this study, logistic regression (LR) (4.16, 25%) and multiple logistic regression (MLR) (4.16, 25%) were the most used. All the included studies indicated improvements in the processes of diagnosis, prediction, and disease outbreak with the help of ML algorithms. Conclusion: The results of the study showed that in all included studies, ML algorithms were an effective approach to facilitate diagnosis, predict consequences for risk classification, and improve resource utilization by predicting the volume of patients or services as well as discovering risk factors. The role of ML algorithms in improving disease diagnosis was more significant than disease prediction and prevalence. Meanwhile, the use of combined methods can optimize differential diagnoses and facilitate the decision-making process for healthcare providers.

Indexed as

algorithmsartificial intelligencemachine learningmeningitis

Identifiers

PMID38357491
PMCPMC10865276
OpenAlexW4391825095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.