ArticleLupus science & medicine2026
Validity and applicability of machine learning models for systemic lupus erythematosus diagnosis.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is clinically complex, and early identification is essential for timely intervention and reducing disease burden. Machine learning offers a promising approach to distinguish early-stage SLE patients from healthy individuals.
methodsA total of 2672 SLE patients and 154 798 healthy controls from the Luzhou (discovery) cohort, along with 2532 SLE patients and 38 597 healthy controls from the Enshi (validation) cohort, were enrolled in this study. A complete machine learning pipeline-including data preprocessing, feature selection, model training and postanalysis, was developed in the Luzhou cohort and subsequently validated in the Enshi cohort. Optimal features and the best-performing model were identified in the Luzhou cohort, then scaled and validated in the Enshi cohort. Model performance was evaluated using 13 binary classification metrics. The optimal feature set and model were integrated to construct an Artificial Intelligence Prediction tool for SLE (AI-PSLE).
resultsFifty candidate features were initially selected in the Luzhou cohort, among which the light gradient boosting (LGB) model demonstrated the best performance following data preprocessing. After scaling in the Enshi cohort, 35 reproducible features were retained. The LGB model based on these 35 features maintained superior performance in the Luzhou cohort and was further successfully validated in both the Enshi and combined Luzhou+Enshi cohorts.
conclusionsWe developed an open-access, clinically user-friendly tool-AI-PSLE-based on 35 routine features, aimed at facilitating the early identification of SLE patients from healthy populations.
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.