Meta-analysis of machine learning models for the diagnosis of central precocious puberty based on clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data.

Background: Central precocious puberty (CPP) is a common endocrine disorder in children, and its diagnosis primarily relies on the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) stimulation test, which is expensive and time-consuming. With the widespread application of artificial intelligence in medicine, some studies have utilized clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data-based machine learning (ML) models to identify CPP. However, the results of these studies varied widely and were challenging to directly compare, mainly due to diverse ML methods. Therefore, the diagnostic value of clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data-based ML models for CPP remains elusive. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of ML models based on clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data for CPP through a meta-analysis of existing studies. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search for relevant English articles on clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data-based ML models for diagnosing CPP, covering the period from the database creation date to December 2023. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated to assess the diagnostic value of clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data-based ML models for diagnosing CPP. The I Results: Six studies met the eligibility criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.82 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.93) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.80-0.90), respectively. The LR+ was 6.00, and the LR- was 0.21, indicating that clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data-based ML models exhibited an excellent ability to confirm or exclude CPP. Additionally, the SROC curve showed that the AUC of the clinical, hormonal (laboratory) and imaging data-based ML models in the diagnosis of CPP was 0.90 (95% CI 0.87-0.92), demonstrating good diagnostic value for CPP. Conclusion: Based on the outcomes of our meta-analysis, clinical and imaging data-based ML models are excellent diagnostic tools with high sensitivity, specificity, and AUC in the diagnosis of CPP. Despite the geographical limitations of the study findings, future research endeavors will strive to address these issues to enhance their applicability and reliability, providing more precise guidance for the differentiation and treatment of CPP.