Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38542244›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2024

Comparison of the Capacity of Several Machine Learning Tools to Assist Immunofluorescence-Based Detection of Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibodies.

Daniel Bertin, Pierre Bongrand, Nathalie Bardin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Daniel BertinService d'Immunologie, Biogénopôle, Hôpital de la Timone, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille (AP-HM), 13005 Marseille, France.
Pierre BongrandLaboratoire Adhésion et Inflammation, Aix-Marseille University, UM61, Campus Luminy, 13009 Marseille, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6185-6572
Nathalie BardinService d'Immunologie, Biogénopôle, Hôpital de la Timone, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille (AP-HM), 13005 Marseille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The success of artificial intelligence and machine learning is an incentive to develop new algorithms to increase the rapidity and reliability of medical diagnosis. Here we compared different strategies aimed at processing microscope images used to detect anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies, an important vasculitis marker: (i) basic classifier methods (logistic regression, k-nearest neighbors and decision tree) were used to process custom-made indices derived from immunofluorescence images yielded by 137 sera. (ii) These methods were combined with dimensional reduction to analyze 1733 individual cell images. (iii) More complex models based on neural networks were used to analyze the same dataset. The efficiency of discriminating between positive and negative samples and different fluorescence patterns was quantified with Rand-type accuracy index, kappa index and ROC curve. It is concluded that basic models trained on a limited dataset allowed for positive/negative discrimination with an efficiency comparable to that obtained by conventional analysis performed by humans (0.84 kappa score). More extensive datasets and more sophisticated models may be required for efficient discrimination between fluorescence patterns generated by different auto-antibody species.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Antineutrophil CytoplasmicArtificial IntelligenceFluorescent Antibody TechniqueHumansMachine LearningReproducibility of ResultsAntibodies, Antineutrophil CytoplasmicANCAartificial intelligenceimage analysisimmunofluorescencemyeloperoxdaseproteinase 3vasculitis

Identifiers

PMID38542244
PMCPMC10969855

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.