ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Development of a machine learning-based risk prediction model for early-stage pneumoconiosis: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The diagnosis of occupational pneumoconiosis requires more accurate predictive models. The purpose of this study is to screen blood markers associated with early pneumoconiosis development from blood routine indicators in physical examination data, and to develop a highly sensitive and accurate clinical prediction model using machine learning (ML) algorithms to promote early diagnosis and timely intervention. Method: Data on age and various blood test results were collected from the results of the physical examination. Predictors were analyzed using the Least Absolute Contraction and Choice Operator (LASSO) and multiple logistic regression. A total of 9 ML models were evaluated in this study, including Logistic Regression (LR), eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), Random Forest (RF), Adaptive Boosting (AdBoost), Gaussian Naïve Bayes (GNB), Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN). We compared the performance of the models based on the following criteria: ROC, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), F1, the decision curve analysis (DCA), calibration curves, and precision-recall (PR) curves of the 9 models. Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) interpretations are developed for personalized risk assessment. Results: In this study, 6 risk variables associated with the development of pneumoconiosis were identified, including White Blood Cell (WBC), Platelet Distribution Width (PDW), Total Bilirubin (TB), Absolute Neutrophil Count (ANC), Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) and Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST). SVM was considered the optimal model and showed a good clinical applicability evaluation. SHAP analysis was employed to define the contributions of 6 variables to the progression of pneumoconiosis. Conclusion: The indicators ultimately established as being associated with pneumoconiosis progression were WBC, PDW, TB, ANC, ALT and AST. The ML algorithm combined blood biochemical indicators to determine the risk factors associated with the occurrence of pneumoconiosis. The SVM model performs well and has the potential to improve early detection and diagnosis in clinical practice.
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.