Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39468522›Full record

SynthesisBMC psychiatry2024

Deep learning approach to predict autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yang Ding, Heng Zhang, Ting Qiu

RetractedAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yang Ding *Departments of Child Health Care, Wuxi Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Affiliated Women's Hospital of Jiangnan University, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, 214002, China.
Heng Zhang *Departments of Child Health Care, Wuxi Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Affiliated Women's Hospital of Jiangnan University, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, 214002, China.
Ting QiuDepartments of Child Health Care, Wuxi Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Affiliated Women's Hospital of Jiangnan University, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, 214002, China. qiuting082@163.com.

Funding

Double Hundred Talent Fund Project of Wuxi Municipal Health Commission HB2020072New technology Project of Wuxi Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital; the Major Project of Wuxi Science and Technology Bureau Y20212007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of the deep learning (DL) approach has been suggested or applied to identify childhood autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The capacity to predict ASD, however, differs across investigations. Our study's objective was to conduct a meta-analysis to determine the DL for ASD in children's classification accuracy.

methodsEligibility criteria were designed according to the purpose of the meta-analysis; PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science Database were searched for articles published up to April 16, 2023, on the accuracy of DL methods for ASD classification. Using the Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) to assess the quality of the included studies. Sensitivity, specificity, areas under the curve (AUC), summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC), and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were compiled by using the bivariate random-effects models.

resultsA total of 11 predictive trials based on DL models were included, involving 9495 ASD patients from 6 different databases. According to bivariate random-effects models' results, the overall sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of the DL technique for ASD were, 0.95 (95% CI = 0.88-0.98), 0.93 (95% CI = 0.85-0.97), and 0.98 (95%CI: 0.97-0.99), respectively. Subgroup analysis results found that different datasets did not cause heterogeneity (meta-regression P = 0.55). The Kaggle dataset's sensitivity and specificity were 0.94 (95%CI: 0.82-1.00) and 0.91 (95%CI: 0.76-1.00), and with 0.97 (95%CI: 0.92-1.00) and 0.97 (95%CI: 0.92-1.00) for ABIDE dataset.

conclusionsDL techniques has satisfactory sensitivity, specificity, and AUC in ASD classification. However, the major heterogeneity of the included studies limited the effectiveness of this meta-analysis. Further trials need to be performed to demonstrate the clinical practicability of DL diagnosis.

Indexed as

Autism Spectrum DisorderDeep LearningChildHumansSensitivity and SpecificityAnd autism spectrum diseaseDeep learningMachine learningMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID39468522
PMCPMC11520796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.