Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39903736›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

The external validity of machine learning-based prediction scores from hematological parameters of COVID-19: A study using hospital records from Brazil, Italy, and Western Europe.

Ali Safdari, Chanda Sai Keshav, Deepanshu Mody, Kshitij Verma, Utsav Kaushal, Vaadeendra Kumar Burra, Sibnath Ray, Debashree Bandyopadhyay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Predicting the severity of COVID-19 using machine learning methods.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ali SafdariDepartment of Biological Sciences, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Chanda Sai KeshavDepartment of Biological Sciences, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Deepanshu ModyDepartment of Biological Sciences, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.ORCID 0000-0002-9483-3227
Kshitij VermaDepartment of Biological Sciences, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Utsav KaushalDepartment of Biological Sciences, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Vaadeendra Kumar BurraDepartment of Biological Sciences, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Sibnath RayGencrest Private Limited, 301-302, B-Wing, Corporate Center, Mumbai, India.
Debashree BandyopadhyayDepartment of Biological Sciences, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.ORCID 0000-0003-4131-907X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The unprecedented worldwide pandemic caused by COVID-19 has motivated several research groups to develop machine-learning based approaches that aim to automate the diagnosis or screening of COVID-19, in large-scale. The gold standard for COVID-19 detection, quantitative-Real-Time-Polymerase-Chain-Reaction (qRT-PCR), is expensive and time-consuming. Alternatively, haematology-based detections were fast and near-accurate, although those were less explored. The external-validity of the haematology-based COVID-19-predictions on diverse populations are yet to be fully investigated. Here we report external-validity of machine learning-based prediction scores from haematological parameters recorded in different hospitals of Brazil, Italy, and Western Europe (raw sample size, 195554). The XGBoost classifier performed consistently better (out of seven ML classifiers) on all the datasets. The working models include a set of either four or fourteen haematological parameters. The internal performances of the XGBoost models (AUC scores range from 84% to 97%) were superior to ML models reported in the literature for some of these datasets (AUC scores range from 84% to 87%). The meta-validation on the external performances revealed the reliability of the performance (AUC score 86%) along with good accuracy of the probabilistic prediction (Brier score 14%), particularly when the model was trained and tested on fourteen haematological parameters from the same country (Brazil). The external performance was reduced when the model was trained on datasets from Italy and tested on Brazil (AUC score 69%) and Western Europe (AUC score 65%); presumably affected by factors, like, ethnicity, phenotype, immunity, reference ranges, across the populations. The state-of-the-art in the present study is the development of a COVID-19 prediction tool that is reliable and parsimonious, using a fewer number of hematological features, in comparison to the earlier study with meta-validation, based on sufficient sample size (n = 195554). Thus, current models can be applied at other demographic locations, preferably, with prior training of the model on the same population. Availability: https://covipred.bits-hyderabad.ac.in/home; https://github.com/debashreebanerjee/CoviPred.

Indexed as

COVID-19Machine LearningAdultAgedBrazilEuropeFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsReproducibility of ResultsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID39903736
PMCPMC11793750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.