ArticleF1000Research2023
COVID-19 Vaccine: Predicting Vaccine Types and Assessing Mortality Risk Through Ensemble Learning Algorithms.
Article in F1000Research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine learning-assisted mRNA vaccine pharmacovigilance: a systematic review of multi-source real-world data.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring the correlates of COVID-19 vaccination inequity: a global analysis using machine learning from a health economic lens.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Article
- Research on the prediction of slow blood flow in pPCI of STEMI patients based on CatBoost.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence models predicting abnormal uterine bleeding after COVID-19 vaccination.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is no doubt that vaccination is crucial for preventing the spread of diseases; however, not every vaccine is perfect or will work for everyone. The main objective of this work is to predict which vaccine will be most effective for a candidate without causing severe adverse reactions and to categorize a patient as potentially at high risk of death from the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: A comprehensive analysis was conducted using a dataset on COVID-19 vaccine adverse reactions, exploring binary and multiclass classification scenarios. Ensemble models, including Random Forest, Decision Tree, Light Gradient Boosting, and extreme gradient boosting algorithm, were utilized to achieve accurate predictions. Class balancing techniques like SMOTE, TOMEK_LINK, and SMOTETOMEK were incorporated to enhance model performance. Results: The study revealed that pre-existing conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, history of allergies, prior vaccinations, other medications, age, and gender were crucial factors associated with poor outcomes. Moreover, using medical history, the ensemble learning classifiers achieved accuracy scores ranging from 75% to 87% in predicting the vaccine type and mortality possibility. The Random Forest model emerged as the best prediction model, while the implementation of the SMOTE and SMOTETOMEK methods generally improved model performance. Conclusion: The random forest model emerges as the top recommendation for machine learning tasks that require high accuracy and resilience. Moreover, the findings highlight the critical role of medical history in optimizing vaccine outcomes and minimizing adverse reactions.
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.