ArticleChina CDC weekly2024
Comparison Between Threshold Method and Artificial Intelligence Approaches for Early Warning of Respiratory Infectious Diseases - Weifang City, Shandong Province, China, 2020-2023.
Article in China CDC weekly, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in early warning systems for infectious disease surveillance: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- AI Agents and Epidemic Intelligence on Respiratory Infectious Diseases: Toward a Conceptual Framework Integrating Decision Support.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Hotspots and Trends in Research on Early Warning of Infectious Diseases: A Bibliometric Analysis Using CiteSpace.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Respiratory infectious diseases, such as influenza and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), present significant global public health challenges. The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) and big data offers opportunities to improve traditional disease surveillance and early warning systems. Methods: The study analyzed data from January 2020 to May 2023, comprising influenza-like illness (ILI) statistics, Baidu index, and clinical data from Weifang. Three methodologies were evaluated: the adaptive dynamic threshold method (ADTM) for dynamic threshold adjustments, the machine learning supervised method (MLSM), and the machine learning unsupervised method (MLUM) utilizing anomaly detection. The comparison focused on sensitivity, specificity, timeliness, and warning consistency. Results: ADTM issued 37 warnings with a sensitivity of 71% and a specificity of 85%. MLSM generated 35 warnings, with a sensitivity of 82% and a specificity of 87%. MLUM produced 63 warnings with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 80%. The initial warnings from ADTM and MLUM preceded those from MLSM by five days. The Kappa coefficient indicated moderate agreement between the methods, with values ranging from 0.52 to 0.62 ( Discussion: The study explores the comparison between traditional methods and two machine learning approaches for early warning systems. It emphasizes the validation of machine learning's reliability and underscores the unique advantages of each method. Furthermore, it stresses the significance of integrating machine learning models with various data sources to enhance public health preparedness and response, alongside acknowledging limitations and the need for broader validation.
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.