ArticleScientific reports2024
Clinical performance of AI-integrated risk assessment pooling reveals cost savings even at high prevalence of COVID-19.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges issues and future recommendations of deep learning techniques for SARS-CoV-2 detection utilising X-ray and CT images: a comprehensive review.PeerJ. Computer science · 2024Article
- Responsible Innovation in AI-Driven Teledentistry: Ethical, Legal, and Economic Considerations for the Globalization Era.Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Individual testing of samples is time- and cost-intensive, particularly during an ongoing pandemic. Better practical alternatives to individual testing can significantly decrease the burden of disease on the healthcare system. Herein, we presented the clinical validation of Segtnan™ on 3929 patients. Segtnan™ is available as a mobile application entailing an AI-integrated personalized risk assessment approach with a novel data-driven equation for pooling of biological samples. The AI was selected from a comparison between 15 machine learning classifiers (highest accuracy = 80.14%) and a feed-forward neural network with an accuracy of 81.38% in predicting the rRT-PCR test results based on a designed survey with minimal clinical questions. Furthermore, we derived a novel pool-size equation from the pooling data of 54 published original studies. The results demonstrated testing capacity increase of 750%, 60%, and 5% at prevalence rates of 0.05%, 22%, and 50%, respectively. Compared to Dorfman's method, our novel equation saved more tests significantly at high prevalence, i.e., 28% (p = 0.006), 40% (p = 0.00001), and 66% (p = 0.02). Lastly, we illustrated the feasibility of the Segtnan™ usage in clinically complex settings like emergency and psychiatric departments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.