ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2024
Enhancing infectious disease prediction model selection with multi-objective optimization: an empirical study.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From COVID-19 to monkeypox: a novel predictive model for emerging infectious diseases.BioData mining · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the pandemic continues to pose challenges to global public health, developing effective predictive models has become an urgent research topic. This study aims to explore the application of multi-objective optimization methods in selecting infectious disease prediction models and evaluate their impact on improving prediction accuracy, generalizability, and computational efficiency. In this study, the NSGA-II algorithm was used to compare models selected by multi-objective optimization with those selected by traditional single-objective optimization. The results indicate that decision tree (DT) and extreme gradient boosting regressor (XGBoost) models selected through multi-objective optimization methods outperform those selected by other methods in terms of accuracy, generalizability, and computational efficiency. Compared to the ridge regression model selected through single-objective optimization methods, the decision tree (DT) and XGBoost models demonstrate significantly lower root mean square error (RMSE) on real datasets. This finding highlights the potential advantages of multi-objective optimization in balancing multiple evaluation metrics. However, this study's limitations suggest future research directions, including algorithm improvements, expanded evaluation metrics, and the use of more diverse datasets. The conclusions of this study emphasize the theoretical and practical significance of multi-objective optimization methods in public health decision support systems, indicating their wide-ranging potential applications in selecting predictive models.
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.