ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of machine learning models for mucopolysaccharidosis early diagnosis using UAE medical records.
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.
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
Rare diseases, such as Mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS), present significant challenges to the healthcare system. Some of the most critical challenges are the delay and the lack of accurate disease diagnosis. Early diagnosis of MPS is crucial, as it has the potential to significantly improve patients' response to treatment, thereby reducing the risk of complications or death. This study evaluates the performance of different machine learning (ML) models for MPS diagnosis using electronic health records (EHR) from the Abu Dhabi Health Services Company (SEHA). The retrospective cohort comprises 115 registered patients aged ≤ 19 Years old from 2004 to 2022. Using nested cross-validation, we trained different feature selection algorithms in combination with various ML algorithms and evaluated their performance with multiple evaluation metrics. Finally, the best-performing model was further interpreted using feature contributions analysis methods such as Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) and Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME). We found that Naive Bayes trained on the domain expert selected features reported a superior performance with an accuracy of 0.93 (0.08), AUC of 0.96 (0.04), F1-score of 0.91 (0.1), and MCC of 0.86 (0.16). SHAP and LIME analysis that were conducted on the best-performing model highlighted key features related to dental manifestations and respiratory infections which are commonly presented in MPS patients, such as acute gingivitis, accretions on teeth, dental caries, acute pharyngitis, acute tonsillitis, and acute bronchitis. This study introduces a cost-effective screening approach for MPS disease using non-invasive EHR, which contributes to the advances in digital screening tools for the early diagnosis of rare diseases.
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.