Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41436514›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

A baseline study of interpretable machine learning using GC-MS breath VOCs for classifying asthma, bronchiectasis, and COPD.

Eun-Ji Ko, Si-On Bae, Daesung Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

3 authors.

Eun-Ji Ko *School of Bio-Health Convergence, College of Natural Sciences, Sungshin Women's University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Si-On Bae *School of Bio-Health Convergence, College of Natural Sciences, Sungshin Women's University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Daesung KangSchool of Bio-Health Convergence, College of Natural Sciences, Sungshin Women's University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. danniskang@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate differentiation among asthma, bronchiectasis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a critical challenge due to overlapping clinical symptoms and limitations of conventional diagnostic tools. This study establishes a transparent, reproducible baseline using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) data derived from exhaled breath to classify asthma, bronchiectasis, and COPD. Using a publicly available clinical dataset comprising 121 breath samples and 76 shared volatile organic compounds (VOCs), we evaluated seven supervised classifiers under nested cross-validation. Among the classifiers, XGBoost achieved the highest performance, with a mean accuracy of 95.83% and macro-averaged AUC of 0.998. To enhance clinical interpretability, we applied Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to identify the most influential VOCs for each disease class. This analysis revealed several candidate biomarkers with disease-specific or cross-disease relevance, such as 2-pentylfuran and hexadecane. This integrative approach demonstrates the potential of breathomics combined with explainable AI as a scalable and non-invasive tool for respiratory disease classification and biomarker discovery. By providing this reproducible baseline, our work offers a reference point for future methodological advances and clinical validation using breathomics data.

Indexed as

AsthmaBronchiectasisGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryMachine LearningPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveVolatile Organic CompoundsAgedBiomarkersBreath TestsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedBiomarkersVolatile Organic CompoundsBreathomics,Machine learningRespiratory diseases classificationShapley additive explanations (SHAP)Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

Identifiers

PMID41436514
PMCPMC12728165

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.