ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2025
Developing an explainable machine learning model to predict false-negative citrin deficiency cases in newborn screening.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 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.
- Harnessing artificial intelligence for pediatric health: Current trends and future opportunities.iScience · 2026Review
- The predictive value ofFrontiers in medicine · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeonatal Intrahepatic Cholestasis caused by Citrin Deficiency (NICCD) is an autosomal recessive disorder affecting the urea cycle and energy metabolism. Newborn screening (NBS) usually relies on elevated citrulline, but some patients have normal citrulline, resulting in false negatives and delayed diagnosis. This study develops an explainable machine learning (ML) model to predict false-negative NICCD cases during NBS.
methodsData from 53 false-negative NICCD patients and 212 controls, collected retrospectively between 2011 and 2024, were analyzed. The dataset was split into a training set (70%) and a test set (30%). External validation involved 48 participants from distinct time periods. Key predictors were identified using variable importance in projection (VIP > 1) and Lasso regression. Six ML models were trained for evaluation: Logistic Regression, Random Forest, Light Gradient Boosting Machine, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), K-Nearest Neighbor, and Support Vector Machines. Performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and F1 score. Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was applied to determine the importance of features and interpret the models.
resultsBirth weight, citrulline, glycine, phenylalanine, ornithine, arginine, proline, succinylacetone, and C10:2 were selected as predictive features. Among the ML models, XGBoost demonstrated the most robust and consistent performance, achieving AUCs of 0.971(95%CI: 0.959-0.979), 0.968, and 0.977, and F1 scores of 0.786(95% CI: 0.744-0.820), 0.828, and 0.833 in the training, test, and external validation sets, respectively. SHAP analysis showed that the most important features are citrulline, glycine, phenylalanine, succinylacetone, birth weight, and ornithine. Feature pairs such as citrulline-phenylalanine, citrulline-glycine, succinylacetone-birth weight, and ornithine-glycine showed varying interactions. SHAP force plots, decision plots, and waterfall plots provided insightful patient-level interpretations. Finally, we built a network calculator for the prediction of false-negative NICCD cases ( https://myapp123.shinyapps.io/my_shiny_app/ ).
conclusionAn interpretable machine learning model utilizing metabolite and demographic data enhances the detection of false-negative NICCD cases, facilitates early identification and intervention, and ultimately improves the overall effectiveness of the newborn screening system.
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.