ArticleScientific reports2025
Distinguishing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis from radiculopathy using machine learning to analyze nerve conduction data.
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.
- Neurofilaments support the differentiation of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis from degenerative cervical myelopathy.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a rare, fatal, and irreversible disease that shares some key clinical features with radiculopathy, including muscle atrophy, muscle cramps, and fasciculation. The aim of this study was to find a reliable method to differentiate these two diseases. Machine learning was used to discover new clinical biomarkers for the differential diagnosis of ALS from radiculopathy using nerve conduction study (NCS) data from patients. Data preparation and feature selection were performed by a random forest classifier algorithm, as well as a confusion matrix tool for model selection. After selecting the minimum number of features and the best algorithm, grid search cross-validation was used to optimize the hyperparameters of the chosen algorithm. 77 features were ranked according to their importance. The results of 20 algorithms acting on 8 different groups of features showed that the best performance (accuracy, precision, recall, f-1 score) was obtained using 35 important features and the XGB algorithm, particularly for the recall parameter. Using the XGB algorithm, ALS patients could be identified with accuracy = 0.871, precision = 0.923, recall = 0.850, and f-1 score = 0.857. The XGB algorithm using 35 NCS features could differentiate radiculopathy from ALS in patients with high accuracy.
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.