ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2025
Machine Learning-Based Diagnosis of Cryptococcal Meningitis and Tuberculous Meningitis: A Single-Center Retrospective Clinical Study.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 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.
- Emerging cryptococcosis cases in Himalayan & sub-Himalayan regions of India.New microbes and new infections · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Differentiating cryptococcal meningitis from tuberculous meningitis is critical for initiating appropriate treatment and improving patient outcomes. However, overlapping pathogenic mechanisms, clinical presentations, laboratory findings, and imaging features complicate accurate diagnosis. Methods: We performed a retrospective single-center study at the First Hospital of Changsha, analyzing medical records from January 2021 to November 2024. A total of 271 patients were included: 125 diagnosed with cryptococcal meningitis and 146 with tuberculous meningitis. Using LASSO regression (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator), we identified 11 potential predictors, which were subsequently refined to 6 key variables: extracranial fungi, cerebrospinal fluid pressure, age, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, albumin levels, and India ink staining. A diagnostic nomogram was constructed through multivariate logistic regression and validated by receiver operating characteristic analysis, calibration plots, decision curve analysis, and SHAP tools (Shapley additive explanations) for model interpretability. Results: The optimized model incorporated 6 variables: extracranial fungal presence, cerebrospinal fluid pressure, patient age, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, albumin levels, and India ink staining. According to SHAP analysis, the significance of these factors in prediction was underscored. The model achieved an area under the curve of 0.919 for the training cohort and 0.921 for the validation cohort, demonstrating robust sensitivity and specificity across both data sets. Additionally, calibration plots and decision curve analysis validated the model's precision and its applicability in clinical settings. Conclusions: The developed nomogram accurately distinguishes cryptococcal meningitis from tuberculous meningitis with superior discriminative ability and clinical relevance, providing a valuable diagnostic tool for clinicians.
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.