ArticleScientific reports2025
Machine learning for predicting medical outcomes associated with acute lithium poisoning.
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 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.
- Prediction of QTc Prolongation in Acute Poisoning with Atypical Antipsychotics Using Machine Learning Techniques: A Study from Poison Control Center.Cardiovascular toxicology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of machine learning algorithms and artificial intelligence in medicine has attracted significant interest due to its ability to aid in predicting medical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the random forest algorithm in predicting medical outcomes related to acute lithium toxicity. We analyzed cases recorded in the National Poison Data System (NPDS) between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018. We highlighted instances of acute lithium toxicity in patients with ages ranging from 0 to 89 years. A random forest model was employed to predict serious medical outcomes, including those with a major effect, moderate effect, or death. Predictions were made using the pre-defined NPDS coding criteria. The model's predictive performance was assessed by computing accuracy, recall (sensitivity), and F1-score. Of the 11,525 reported cases of lithium poisoning documented during the study, 2,760 cases were categorized as acute lithium overdose. One hundred thirty-nine individuals experienced severe outcomes, whereas 2,621 patients endured minor outcomes. The random forest model exhibited exceptional accuracy and F1-scores, achieving values of 99%, 98%, and 98% for the training, validation, and test datasets, respectively. The model achieved an accuracy rate of 100% and a sensitivity rate of 96% for important results. In addition, it achieved a 96% accuracy rate and a sensitivity rate of 100% for minor outcomes. The SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) study found factors, including drowsiness/lethargy, age, ataxia, abdominal pain, and electrolyte abnormalities, significantly influenced individual predictions. The random forest algorithm achieved a 98% accuracy rate in predicting medical outcomes for patients with acute lithium intoxication. The model demonstrated high sensitivity and precision in accurately predicting significant and minor outcomes. Further investigation is necessary to authenticate these findings.
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.