Machine Learning Algorithms for Prediabetes Risk Calculation: a Protocol of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract Background One strategy to resolve the increasing prevalence of T2DM is to identify and administer interventions to prediabetes patients. Risk assessment tools help detect diseases, by allowing screening to the high risk group. Machine learning is also used to help diagnosis and identification of prediabetes. This review aims to determine the diagnostic test accuracy of various machine learning algorithms for calculating prediabetes risk.Methods This protocol was written in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis for Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. The databases that will be used include PubMed, ProQuest and EBSCO restricted to January 1999 and May 2019 in English language only. Identification of articles will be done independently by two reviewers through the titles, the abstracts, and then the full-text-articles. Any disagreement will be resolved by consensus. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale will be used to measure the quality and potential of bias. Data extraction and content analysis will be performed systematically. Quantitative data will be visualized using a forest plot with the 95% Confidence Intervals. The diagnostic test outcome will be described by the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Data will be analyzed using Review Manager 5.3 (RevMan 5.3) software package.Discussion We will obtain diagnostic accuracy of various machine learning algorithms for prediabetes risk estimation using this proposed systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic review registration: This protocol has been registered in the Prospective Registry of Systematic Review (PROSPERO) database. The registration number is CRD42021251242.

Download Full-text

Diagnostic test accuracy for use of machine learning in diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.14108 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Sun Jae Moon ◽

Jin Seub Hwang ◽

Rajesh Kana ◽

John Torous ◽

Jung Won Kim

Keyword(s):

Machine Learning ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Learning Algorithms ◽

Structural Mri ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Machine Learning Algorithms ◽

Spectrum Disorder ◽

Test Accuracy

BACKGROUND Over the recent years, machine learning algorithms have been more widely and increasingly applied in biomedical fields. In particular, its application has been drawing more attention in the field of psychiatry, for instance, as diagnostic tests/tools for autism spectrum disorder. However, given its complexity and potential clinical implications, there is ongoing need for further research on its accuracy. OBJECTIVE The current study aims to summarize the evidence for the accuracy of use of machine learning algorithms in diagnosing autism spectrum disorder (ASD) through systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete (with OpenDissertations), PsyINFO and IEEE Xplore Digital Library databases were searched on November 28th, 2018. Studies, which used a machine learning algorithm partially or fully in classifying ASD from controls and provided accuracy measures, were included in our analysis. Bivariate random effects model was applied to the pooled data in meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was used to investigate and resolve the source of heterogeneity between studies. True-positive, false-positive, false negative and true-negative values from individual studies were used to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity values, draw SROC curves, and obtain area under the curve (AUC) and partial AUC. RESULTS A total of 43 studies were included for the final analysis, of which meta-analysis was performed on 40 studies (53 samples with 12,128 participants). A structural MRI subgroup meta-analysis (12 samples with 1,776 participants) showed the sensitivity at 0.83 (95% CI-0.76 to 0.89), specificity at 0.84 (95% CI -0.74 to 0.91), and AUC/pAUC at 0.90/0.83. An fMRI/deep neural network (DNN) subgroup meta-analysis (five samples with 1,345 participants) showed the sensitivity at 0.69 (95% CI- 0.62 to 0.75), the specificity at 0.66 (95% CI -0.61 to 0.70), and AUC/pAUC at 0.71/0.67. CONCLUSIONS Machine learning algorithms that used structural MRI features in diagnosis of ASD were shown to have accuracy that is similar to currently used diagnostic tools.

Download Full-text

Accuracy of Machine Learning Algorithms for the Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies

JMIR Mental Health ◽

10.2196/14108 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (12) ◽

pp. e14108 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sun Jae Moon ◽

Jinseub Hwang ◽

Rajesh Kana ◽

John Torous ◽

Jung Won Kim

Keyword(s):

Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽

Machine Learning ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Learning Algorithms ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Machine Learning Algorithms ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Accuracy Measures

Background In the recent years, machine learning algorithms have been more widely and increasingly applied in biomedical fields. In particular, their application has been drawing more attention in the field of psychiatry, for instance, as diagnostic tests/tools for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, given their complexity and potential clinical implications, there is an ongoing need for further research on their accuracy. Objective This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the available evidence for the accuracy of machine learning algorithms in diagnosing ASD. Methods The following databases were searched on November 28, 2018: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete (with Open Dissertations), PsycINFO, and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore Digital Library. Studies that used a machine learning algorithm partially or fully for distinguishing individuals with ASD from control subjects and provided accuracy measures were included in our analysis. The bivariate random effects model was applied to the pooled data in a meta-analysis. A subgroup analysis was used to investigate and resolve the source of heterogeneity between studies. True-positive, false-positive, false-negative, and true-negative values from individual studies were used to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity values, draw Summary Receiver Operating Characteristics curves, and obtain the area under the curve (AUC) and partial AUC (pAUC). Results A total of 43 studies were included for the final analysis, of which a meta-analysis was performed on 40 studies (53 samples with 12,128 participants). A structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI) subgroup meta-analysis (12 samples with 1776 participants) showed a sensitivity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.76-0.89), a specificity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.74-0.91), and AUC/pAUC of 0.90/0.83. A functional magnetic resonance imaging/deep neural network subgroup meta-analysis (5 samples with 1345 participants) showed a sensitivity of 0.69 (95% CI 0.62-0.75), specificity of 0.66 (95% CI 0.61-0.70), and AUC/pAUC of 0.71/0.67. Conclusions The accuracy of machine learning algorithms for diagnosis of ASD was considered acceptable by few accuracy measures only in cases of sMRI use; however, given the many limitations indicated in our study, further well-designed studies are warranted to extend the potential use of machine learning algorithms to clinical settings. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42018117779; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=117779

Download Full-text