ArticleScientific reports2025
Development and validation of a machine learning approach for screening new leprosy cases based on the leprosy suspicion questionnaire.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Serum geoepidemiology of leprosy biomarkers in a city-wide COVID-19 survey in Brazil.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Independent assessment of the WHO Skin Neglected Tropical Diseases application for leprosy detection.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Leprosy is a dermatoneurological disease and can cause irreversible nerve damage. In addition to being able to mimic different rheumatological, neurological and dermatological diseases, leprosy is underdiagnosed because several professionals present lack of training. The World Health Organization instituted active search for new leprosy cases as one of the four pillars of the zero-leprosy strategy. The Leprosy Suspicion Questionnaire (LSQ) was created aiming to be a screening tool to actively detect new cases; it is composed of 14 simple yes/no questions that can be answered with the help of a health professional or by the very patient themselves. During its development, it was noticed that the combination of marked questions was related to new case detections. To better encapsulate and being able to expand its use, we developed MaLeSQs, a Machine Learning tool whose output may be LSQ Positive when the subject is indicated for being further clinically evaluated or LSQ Negative when the subject does not present any evidence that justify being further evaluated for leprosy. To achieve a reasonable product, we trained four classifiers with different learning paradigms, Support Vectors Machine, Logistic Regression, Random Forest and XGBoost. We compared them based on sensitivity, specificity, positive predicted value, negative predicted value, and area under the ROC curve. After the training process, the Support Vectors Machine was the classifier with the most balanced metrics of 85.7% sensitivity, 69.2% specificity, 18.6% precision, 98.3% negative predicted values and an area under the ROC curve of 0.775, and it was chosen as the MaLeSQs. With Shapley values, we were able to evaluate variable importance and nerve symptoms were considered important to differentiate between subjects that potentially had leprosy from those who did not.
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.