ArticlePloS one2026
Explainable machine learning for the early differentiation of pediatric bronchopneumonia using routine laboratory parameters.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEarly differentiation of pediatric acute respiratory infections in outpatient and emergency settings is often hindered by nonspecific clinical signs, leading to unnecessary empirical antibiotic use and avoidable radiation exposure. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and internally evaluate an early triage model to distinguish pediatric bronchopneumonia (BP) from uncomplicated upper respiratory tract infection using routine, cost-effective laboratory parameters analyzed with machine-learning algorithms.
methodsThis retrospective study consecutively enrolled 532 pediatric patients who presented with mild respiratory symptoms at their initial visit, comprising 218 in the BP group and 314 in the Upper Respiratory Tract Infection (URTI) group. Core laboratory indicators were selected using a dual-dimensionality reduction strategy that integrated the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression with the Boruta algorithm. Seven machine learning classifiers were then constructed and compared based on the resulting feature matrix. The Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) framework was subsequently applied to interpret the nonlinear predictive mechanisms of the optimal model.
resultsThis study constructed seven machine learning models: Logistic Regression (LR), Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Lightweight Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). In the internal validation set, the SVM model demonstrated favorable predictive performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.921 (95% confidence interval: 0.874-0.959). Based on Platt-scaled probability estimates, the SVM model showed the lowest Brier score among the evaluated models, with a Brier score of 0.112. Decision curve analysis confirmed this model's positive net clinical benefit across a broad range of threshold probabilities. SHAP analysis further elucidated the nonlinear contribution weights of multiple conventional parameters at specific physiological thresholds.
conclusionsThe multidimensional SVM risk quantification model, based on nine routine laboratory parameters, provides an accurate and objective assessment of pediatric BP risk. This model holds significant potential for clinical translation as a noninvasive, cost-effective triage tool in emergency departments. Its application could effectively reduce unnecessary radiographic screening and excessive antibiotic use.
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.