SynthesisJMIR medical informatics2025
The Use of Machine Learning for Analyzing Real-World Data in Disease Prediction and Management: Systematic Review.
Synthesis in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting kinesiophobia in knee osteoarthritis: a head-to-head comparison between machine learning and traditional regression models.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Missing-data-aware machine learning prediction of in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Predicting short birth intervals in Bangladesh using stacked machine learning and SHAP explainability: evidence from BDHS 2022.Reproductive health · 2026Article
- The problem with the 'truth': rethinking ground truth for artificial intelligence in endometriosis diagnosis.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Global Trends in Integrating Machine Learning (ML) with Model-Informed Drug Development (MIDD): A Bibliometric and Systematic Review (2015-2025).Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Development and validation of a machine learning model for community-based tuberculosis screening among persons aged ≥ 15 years in South Africa and Zambia.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Review
- Explainable Machine Learning for Assessing Digital Health Literacy in Older Adults: Validation and Development of a Two-Stage Model Integrating Performance-Based and Self-Assessed Indicators.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Venous Thromboembolism Prevention: A Narrative Review of Machine Learning, Deep Learning, and Natural Language Processing.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Interpretable Machine Learning with SHAP Identifies Key Biomarkers in a Multi-Factorial Spectrum of Age-Related Neurological and Metabolic Conditions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Neutrophil Percentage-to-Albumin Ratio as a Novel Prognostic Biomarker in Adult Diffuse Gliomas: Retrospective Study Integrating 3 Machine Learning Models and Cox Regression.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Systems-level analyses and clinical validation highlight CD53 as a diagnostic and prognostic marker in lung adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- Before the algorithm: An exemplar case of the necessity of statistical testing for epidemiological consistency in public health data.AIMS public health · 2026Article
- Psychosocial determinants of anti-VEGF treatment adherence in AMD patients: optimization of one-stop intravitreal injection service model.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Bridging the gap: methodological challenges and innovations in systematic reviews of machine learning models in healthcare.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Predicting Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Outcomes: Machine Learning Model Development and Validation Using a Large Administrative Claims Database.JMIR cardio · 2025Article
- Predicting ADHD in Children and Adolescents With Artificial Intelligence: A Scoping Review of Common Models.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Serum alpha-1-microglobulin as a predictor of multiple complications in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.World journal of diabetes · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a nutrition-integrated nomogram for predicting 28-day mortality in sepsis patients.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Review
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
backgroundMachine learning (ML) and big data analytics are rapidly transforming health care, particularly disease prediction, management, and personalized care. With the increasing availability of real-world data (RWD) from diverse sources, such as electronic health records (EHRs), patient registries, and wearable devices, ML techniques present substantial potential to enhance clinical outcomes. Despite this promise, challenges such as data quality, model transparency, generalizability, and integration into clinical practice persist.
objectiveThis systematic review aims to examine the use of ML for analyzing RWD in disease prediction and management, identifying the most commonly used ML methods, prevalent disease types, study designs, and the sources of real-world evidence (RWE). It also explores the strengths and limitations of current practices, offering insights for future improvements.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to identify studies using ML techniques for analyzing RWD in disease prediction and management. The search focused on extracting data regarding the ML algorithms applied; disease categories studied; types of study designs (eg, clinical trials and cohort studies); and the sources of RWE, including EHRs, patient registries, and wearable devices. Studies published between 2014 and 2024 were included to ensure the analysis of the most recent advances in the field.
resultsThis review identified 57 studies that met the inclusion criteria, with a total sample size of >150,000 patients. The most frequently applied ML methods were random forest (n=24, 42%), logistic regression (n=21, 37%), and support vector machines (n=18, 32%). These methods were predominantly used for predictive modeling across disease areas, including cardiovascular diseases (n=19, 33%), cancer (n=9, 16%), and neurological disorders (n=6, 11%). RWE was primarily sourced from EHRs, patient registries, and wearable devices. A substantial portion of studies (n=38, 67%) focused on improving clinical decision-making, patient stratification, and treatment optimization. Among these studies, 14 (25%) focused on decision-making; 12 (21%) on health care outcomes, such as quality of life, recovery rates, and adverse events; and 11 (19%) on survival prediction, particularly in oncology and chronic diseases. For example, random forest models for cardiovascular disease prediction demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.89), while support vector machine models for cancer prognosis achieved an accuracy of 83% (P=.04). Despite the promising outcomes, many (n=34, 60%) studies faced challenges related to data quality, model interpretability, and ensuring generalizability across diverse patient populations.
conclusionsThis systematic review highlights the significant potential of ML and big data analytics in health care, especially for improving disease prediction and management. However, to fully realize the benefits of these technologies, future research must focus on addressing the challenges of data quality, enhancing model transparency, and ensuring the broader applicability of ML models across diverse populations and clinical settings.
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.