ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Decoding Wilson disease: a machine learning approach to predict neurological symptoms.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
- Diagnostic challenges and mimicking disorders of Wilson's Disease: A comprehensive review.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2026Review
- Multiscale computational genomics in Wilson disease: from atomic dynamics to clinical prediction.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Wilson disease (WD) is a rare autosomal recessive disorder caused by a mutation in the Methods: The study population consisted of WD patients who received treatment at the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Traditional Chinese Medicine from July 2021 to September 2023 and had a Leipzig score ≥ 4 points. Indicators such as general clinical information, imaging, blood and urine tests, and clinical scale measurements were collected from patients, and machine learning methods were employed to construct a prediction model for neurological symptoms. Additionally, the SHAP method was utilized to analyze clinical information to determine which indicators are associated with neurological symptoms. Results: In this study, 185 patients with WD (of whom 163 had neurological symptoms) were analyzed. It was found that using the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) to predict achieved good performance, with an MCC value of 0.556, ACC value of 0.929, AUROC value of 0.835, and AUPRC value of 0.975. Brainstem damage, blood creatinine (Cr), age, indirect bilirubin (IBIL), and ceruloplasmin (CP) were the top five important predictors. Meanwhile, the presence of brainstem damage and the higher the values of Cr, Age, and IBIL, the more likely neurological symptoms were to occur, while the lower the CP value, the more likely neurological symptoms were to occur. Conclusions: To sum up, the prediction model constructed using machine learning methods to predict WD cirrhosis has high accuracy. The most important indicators in the prediction model were brainstem damage, Cr, age, IBIL, and CP. It provides assistance for clinical decision-making.
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.