ArticleDigital health
Optimizing deep learning models to combat amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) disease progression.
Article in Digital health. 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.
- Development of a machine learning-based survival prediction model for ALS inclusive of the advanced-stage population.Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration · 2026Article
- Unraveling the Effects ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a devastating neurodegenerative disease, poses a significant challenge for targeted treatment development. Accurate prediction of its progression is crucial for this endeavor. Methods: This study investigated deep learning methods for ALS progression prediction using the publicly available PRO-ACT dataset. Initially, machine learning models (XGBoost, LightGBM) and a deep learning sequential model were evaluated with default parameters, using R-squared (R2) and Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) as performance metrics. Results: Notably, the deep learning model demonstrated superior predictive performance with default settings (RMSE: 4.565, R2: 0.716), followed by XGBoost (RMSE: 4.625, R2: 0.709) and LightGBM (RMSE: 4.596, R2: 0.716). Subsequently, hyperparameter optimization significantly enhanced the deep learning model's performance, achieving the highest prediction accuracy (RMSE: 4.511, R2: 0.718). Slight improvements were also observed for XGBoost (RMSE: 4.532, R2: 0.715) and LightGBM (RMSE: 4.551, R2: 0.716). Furthermore, the optimized XGBoost model demonstrated exceptional classification performance in distinguishing between bulbar and limb onset ALS, with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 97.44%, accuracy of 97.96%, F1-score of 95.96%, Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) of 94.12%, and an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.9550. Feature importance analysis with optimized XGBoost identified ZBTB2P1 as the most influential feature, followed by RNF181, with WASH9P being the least influential among the top eight. Conclusions: These findings convincingly demonstrate the potential of optimized XGBoost and deep learning for ALS progression prediction and classification, particularly with optimized parameters. This approach offers significant potential for early risk stratification, personalized treatment planning, enhanced prognostic communication, diagnostic support, streamlined disease monitoring, and improved clinical decision-making, ultimately contributing to better patient outcomes and potentially reducing ALS-related mortality.
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.