ArticleArthritis research & therapy2024
Early identification of macrophage activation syndrome secondary to systemic lupus erythematosus with machine learning.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity and applicability of machine learning models for systemic lupus erythematosus diagnosis.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Prognostic value ofFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- XGBoost-SHAP-based interpretable diagnostic framework for knee osteoarthritis: a population-based retrospective cohort study.Arthritis research & therapy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) secondary to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a severe and life-threatening complication. Early diagnosis of MAS is particularly challenging. In this study, machine learning models and diagnostic scoring card were developed to aid in clinical decision-making using clinical characteristics.
methodsWe retrospectively collected clinical data from 188 patients with either SLE or the MAS secondary to SLE. 13 significant clinical predictor variables were filtered out using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO). These variables were subsequently utilized as inputs in five machine learning models. The performance of the models was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC), F1 score, and F2 score. To enhance clinical usability, we developed a diagnostic scoring card based on logistic regression (LR) analysis and Chi-Square binning, establishing probability thresholds and stratification for the card. Additionally, this study collected data from four other domestic hospitals for external validation.
resultsAmong all the machine learning models, the LR model demonstrates the highest level of performance in internal validation, achieving a ROC-AUC of 0.998, an F1 score of 0.96, and an F2 score of 0.952. The score card we constructed identifies the probability threshold at a score of 49, achieving a ROC-AUC of 0.994 and an F2 score of 0.936. The score results were categorized into five groups based on diagnostic probability: extremely low (below 5%), low (5-25%), normal (25-75%), high (75-95%), and extremely high (above 95%). During external validation, the performance evaluation revealed that the Support Vector Machine (SVM) model outperformed other models with an AUC value of 0.947, and the scorecard model has an AUC of 0.915. Additionally, we have established an online assessment system for early identification of MAS secondary to SLE.
conclusionMachine learning models can significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy of MAS secondary to SLE, and the diagnostic scorecard model can facilitate personalized probabilistic predictions of disease occurrence in clinical environments.
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.