Diagnostic accuracy of machine learning approaches to identify psoriatic arthritis: a meta-analysis

机器学习方法在识别银屑病关节炎方面的诊断准确性:一项荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

While machine learning (ML) approaches are commonly utilized in medical diagnostics, the accuracy of these methods in identifying psoriatic arthritis (PsA) remains uncertain. To evaluate the accuracy of ML approaches in the medical diagnosis of PsA. As a result, we thoroughly searched PubMed, Web of Science (WoS), Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) between their inception and October 1, 2024. The overall test performance of ML approaches was evaluated using the following metrics: pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), the area under the curve (AUC), and Fagan plot analysis. Additionally, we assessed the publication bias using the asymmetry test of the Deeks funnel plot. Six studies were included. The combined diagnostic data showed sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI 0.60-0.81), specificity of 0.81 (95% CI 0.61-0.92), PLR of 4.00 (95% CI 3.06-5.23), NLR of 0.41 (95% CI 0.34-0.49), DOR of 11.06 (95% CI 6.42-19.06), and AUC of 0.81 (95% CI 0.78-0.84). The Fagan plot showed that the positive probability is 48% and the negative probability is 8%. Meta-regression identified country and sample size (all P < 0.05) as key sources of heterogeneity. The Deek funnel plot suggested that publication bias has no statistical significance (P = 0.99). The study suggests a promising accuracy of ML approaches in diagnosing PsA.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。