ArticlePloS one2024
Enhancing generalization in a Kawasaki Disease prediction model using data augmentation: Cross-validation of patients from two major hospitals in Taiwan.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Kawasaki Disease: Unraveling Immunopathogenesis, Genetic Factors, and AI Applications in Diagnosis with a Focus on Iran.Pediatric cardiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Kawasaki Disease (KD) is a rare febrile illness affecting infants and young children, potentially leading to coronary artery complications and, in severe cases, mortality if untreated. However, KD is frequently misdiagnosed as a common fever in clinical settings, and the inherent data imbalance further complicates accurate prediction when using traditional machine learning and statistical methods. This paper introduces two advanced approaches to address these challenges, enhancing prediction accuracy and generalizability. The first approach proposes a stacking model termed the Disease Classifier (DC), specifically designed to recognize minority class samples within imbalanced datasets, thereby mitigating the bias commonly observed in traditional models toward the majority class. Secondly, we introduce a combined model, the Disease Classifier with CTGAN (CTGAN-DC), which integrates DC with Conditional Tabular Generative Adversarial Network (CTGAN) technology to improve data balance and predictive performance further. Utilizing CTGAN-based oversampling techniques, this model retains the original data characteristics of KD while expanding data diversity. This effectively balances positive and negative KD samples, significantly reducing model bias toward the majority class and enhancing both predictive accuracy and generalizability. Experimental evaluations indicate substantial performance gains, with the DC and CTGAN-DC models achieving notably higher predictive accuracy than individual machine learning models. Specifically, the DC model achieves sensitivity and specificity rates of 95%, while the CTGAN-DC model achieves 95% sensitivity and 97% specificity, demonstrating superior recognition capability. Furthermore, both models exhibit strong generalizability across diverse KD datasets, particularly the CTGAN-DC model, which surpasses the JAMA model with a 3% increase in sensitivity and a 95% improvement in generalization sensitivity and specificity, effectively resolving the model collapse issue observed in the JAMA model. In sum, the proposed DC and CTGAN-DC architectures demonstrate robust generalizability across multiple KD datasets from various healthcare institutions and significantly outperform other models, including XGBoost. These findings lay a solid foundation for advancing disease prediction in the context of imbalanced medical data.
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.