Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41158154›Full record

ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2025

Evaluating pediatric peripheral neuromuscular disorders using deep neural networks on electrodiagnostic data.

G K Cooray, L Nastasi, D Motan, J Deeb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

G K CoorayGreat Ormond Street Hospital, Great Ormond Street, London, WC1N 3JH, UK.
L NastasiGreat Ormond Street Hospital, Great Ormond Street, London, WC1N 3JH, UK.
D MotanGreat Ormond Street Hospital, Great Ormond Street, London, WC1N 3JH, UK.
J DeebGreat Ormond Street Hospital, Great Ormond Street, London, WC1N 3JH, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to assess application of deep neural networks to predict neuromuscular disorders in patients based on electrodiagnostic data and compare with clinical assessment. Methods: Patients evaluated with electrodiagnostic tests in intensive care over a 10-year period were included in this study. The data set contained both electrodiagnostic and clinical information. Based on the final diagnosis, patients were classified into six groups: non-primary neuromuscular disorders, neuropathy, motor-neuronopathy, myopathy, neuromuscular-junction disorders, and critical-illness neuromyopathy. The neural network was trained on the data. Results: The data set was small, allowing training of the neural network on a standard laptop. The validation results were promising, with an accuracy of 0.92, an ROC-AUC of 0.99, and a precision recall AUC of 0.97. The confusion and positive predictive value matrix demonstrated high performance, with diagonal values exceeding 0.82. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the efficacy of neural networks in predicting neuromuscular disorders using electrodiagnostic tests. The performance of the model was comparable to clinical assessment. These findings suggest that with more extensive datasets, neural networks can provide reliable estimates of neuromuscular diagnoses. Significance: Incorporating neural networks into diagnostic workflows could enhance decision-making, especially in scenarios requiring reassessment or complementary investigations.

Indexed as

AIDiagnostic accuracyEMGNeural networks

Identifiers

PMID41158154
PMCPMC12557562

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.