ArticleFrontiers in antibiotics2023
A comparison of various feature extraction and machine learning methods for antimicrobial resistance prediction in
Article in Frontiers in antibiotics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting clinical outcome ofMicrobial genomics · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based virtual screening and density functional theory characterisation of natural inhibitors targeting mutant PBP2x in Streptococcus pneumoniae.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Using genomic data and machine learning to predict antibiotic resistance: A tutorial paper.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Harmonization of supervised machine learning practices for efficient source attribution of Listeria monocytogenes based on genomic data.BMC genomics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Streptococcus pneumoniae is one of the major concerns of clinicians and one of the global public health problems. This pathogen is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). In the last few years, reduced genome sequencing costs have made it possible to explore more of the drug resistance of S. pneumoniae, and machine learning (ML) has become a popular tool for understanding, diagnosing, treating, and predicting these phenotypes. Nucleotide k-mers, amino acid k-mers, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and combinations of these features have rich genetic information in whole-genome sequencing. This study compares different ML models for predicting AMR phenotype for S. pneumoniae. We compared nucleotide k-mers, amino acid k-mers, SNPs, and their combinations to predict AMR in S. pneumoniae for three antibiotics: Penicillin, Erythromycin, and Tetracycline. 980 pneumococcal strains were downloaded from the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA). Furthermore, we used and compared several machine learning methods to train the models, including random forests, support vector machines, stochastic gradient boosting, and extreme gradient boosting. In this study, we found that key features of the AMR prediction model setup and the choice of machine learning method affected the results. The approach can be applied here to further studies to improve AMR prediction accuracy and efficiency.
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.