ArticleJournal of translational medicine2025
Diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome using beat-to-beat autonomic measurements.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn artificial intelligence (AI) pipeline was used to differentiate patients suffering from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) from healthy controls (HC) based on high-frequency, large-scale data obtained using beat-to-beat measurement of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) and cardiovascular function.
methodsThis prospective, case-control study included a cohort of 112 CFS patients and 61 HCs examined. Heart rate (HR), high-frequency R-to-R interval (HF RRI), diastolic blood pressure (dBP), stroke volume (SV), and SV index (SV/FFM) were measured using the Task Force Monitor. A novel sequential learning approach was applied: first, a Transformer model was trained, followed by an XGBoost classifier that learned from the errors of the Transformer. Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), accuracy, and Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (ROC AUC) were assessed. Model classifications were explained globally.
resultsThe applied classifier achieved a subject-level accuracy of 0.89, an MCC of 0.79, and an AUC of 1.00. Lower values of beat-to-beat difference in HR and raw HF RRI (indicating reduced cardiac vagal tone) and higher values of dBP difference (more beat-to-beat increases, indicating higher sympathetic vascular tone) were related to being more likely classified as CFS patients. Low values of SV difference and low values of SV/FFM (both indicating less effective cardiac hemodynamics) were related to being more likely classified as CFS patients.
conclusionsThe AI-driven classifier demonstrates remarkable proficiency in distinguishing between patients with CFS and HC. By leveraging this automated pipeline, beat-to-beat measurements of the ANS can significantly enhance the objective assessment of CFS diagnosis.
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.