ArticleHeliyon2023
Machine learning for detecting Wilson's disease by amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wilson's disease (WD) is a genetic disorder with the A7P7B gene mutations. It is difficult to diagnose in clinic. The purpose of this study was to confirm whether amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (ALFF) is one of the potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of WD. The study enrolled 30 healthy controls (HCs) and 37 WD patients (WDs) to obtain their resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) data. ALFF was obtained through preprocessing of the rs-fMRI data. To distinguish between patients with WDs and HCs, four clusters with abnormal ALFF-z values were identified through between-group comparisons. Based on these clusters, three machine learning models were developed, including Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Logistic Regression (LR). Abnormal ALFF z-values were also combined with volume information, clinical variables, and imaging features to develop machine learning models. There were 4 clusters where the ALFF z-values of the WDs were significantly higher than that of the HCs. Cluster1 was in the cerebellar region, Cluster2 was in the left caudate nucleus, Cluster3 was in the bilateral thalamus, and Cluster4 was in the right caudate nucleus. In the training set and test set, the models trained with Cluster2, Cluster3, and Cluster4 achieved area of curve (AUC) greater than 0.80. In the Delong test, only the AUC values of models trained with Cluster4 exhibited statistical significance. The AUC values of the Logit model (P = 0.04) and RF model (P = 0.04) were significantly higher than those of the SVM model. In the test set, the LR model and RF model trained with Cluster3 had high specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy. By conducting the Delong test, we discovered that there was no statistically significant inter-group difference in AUC values between the model that integrates multi-modal information and the model before fusion. The LR models trained with multimodal information and Cluster 4, as well as the LR and RF models trained with multimodal information and Cluster 3, have demonstrated high accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity. Overall, these findings suggest that using ALFF based on the thalamus or caudate nucleus as markers can effectively differentiate between WDs and HCs. The fusion of multimodal information did not significantly improve the classification performance of the models before fusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.