ArticleClinical drug investigation2024
Prediction Models for Intravenous Immunoglobulin Non-Responders of Kawasaki Disease Using Machine Learning.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality and performance of machine learning versus logistic regression for predicting IVIG resistance in Kawasaki disease: a PROBAST+AI systematic comparison.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Pooled it
- Machine learning prediction models for intravenous immunoglobulin resistance in Kawasaki disease: a meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Coronary Artery Brightness on Echocardiography as a Novel Marker in Kawasaki Disease - Machine Learning-Based Cluster Analysis.Circulation reports · 2026Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Vasculitides: A Systematic Review.ACR open rheumatology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveIntravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is a prominent therapeutic agent for Kawasaki disease (KD) that significantly reduces the incidence of coronary artery anomalies. Various methodologies, including machine learning, have been employed to develop IVIG non-responder prediction models; however, their validation and reproducibility remain unverified. This study aimed to develop a predictive scoring system for identifying IVIG nonresponders and rigorously test the accuracy and reliability of this system.
methodsThe study included an exposure group of 228 IVIG non-responders and a control group of 997 IVIG responders. Subsequently, a predictive machine learning model was constructed. The Shizuoka score, including variables such as the "initial treatment date" (cutoff: < 4 days), sodium level (cutoff: < 133 mEq/L), total bilirubin level (cutoff: ≥ 0.5 mg/dL), and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (cutoff: ≥ 2.6), was established. Patients meeting two or more of these criteria were grouped as high-risk IVIG non-responders. Using the Shizuoka score to stratify IVIG responders, propensity score matching was used to analyze 85 patients each for IVIG and IVIG-added prednisolone treatment in the high-risk group. In the IVIG plus prednisolone group, the IVIG non-responder count significantly decreased (p < 0.001), with an odds ratio of 0.192 (95% confidence interval 0.078-0.441).
conclusionsIntravenous immunoglobulin non-responders were predicted using machine learning models and validated using propensity score matching. The initiation of initial IVIG-added prednisolone treatment in the high-risk group identified by the Shizuoka score, crafted using machine learning models, appears useful for predicting IVIG non-responders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38869717What 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.