Selected article for: "combined test and confidence interval"

Author: Goodman-Meza, David; Rudas, Akos; Chiang, Jeffrey N.; Adamson, Paul C.; Ebinger, Joseph; Sun, Nancy; Botting, Patrick; Fulcher, Jennifer A.; Saab, Faysal G.; Brook, Rachel; Eskin, Eleazar; An, Ulzee; Kordi, Misagh; Jew, Brandon; Balliu, Brunilda; Chen, Zeyuan; Hill, Brian L.; Rahmani, Elior; Halperin, Eran; Manuel, Vladimir
Title: A machine learning algorithm to increase COVID-19 inpatient diagnostic capacity
  • Cord-id: 895rb4mx
  • Document date: 2020_9_22
  • ID: 895rb4mx
    Snippet: Worldwide, testing capacity for SARS-CoV-2 is limited and bottlenecks in the scale up of polymerase chain reaction (PCR-based testing exist. Our aim was to develop and evaluate a machine learning algorithm to diagnose COVID-19 in the inpatient setting. The algorithm was based on basic demographic and laboratory features to serve as a screening tool at hospitals where testing is scarce or unavailable. We used retrospectively collected data from the UCLA Health System in Los Angeles, California. W
    Document: Worldwide, testing capacity for SARS-CoV-2 is limited and bottlenecks in the scale up of polymerase chain reaction (PCR-based testing exist. Our aim was to develop and evaluate a machine learning algorithm to diagnose COVID-19 in the inpatient setting. The algorithm was based on basic demographic and laboratory features to serve as a screening tool at hospitals where testing is scarce or unavailable. We used retrospectively collected data from the UCLA Health System in Los Angeles, California. We included all emergency room or inpatient cases receiving SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing who also had a set of ancillary laboratory features (n = 1,455) between 1 March 2020 and 24 May 2020. We tested seven machine learning models and used a combination of those models for the final diagnostic classification. In the test set (n = 392), our combined model had an area under the receiver operator curve of 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.87–0.96). The model achieved a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI 0.85–0.98), specificity of 0.64 (95% CI 0.58–0.69). We found that our machine learning algorithm had excellent diagnostic metrics compared to SARS-CoV-2 PCR. This ensemble machine learning algorithm to diagnose COVID-19 has the potential to be used as a screening tool in hospital settings where PCR testing is scarce or unavailable.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • absence presence and active disease: 1, 2, 3
    • absence presence and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • absence presence and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • absence presence and logistic regression random forest: 1, 2
    • absence presence and los angeles: 1, 2, 3
    • absence presence and low resource: 1
    • absolute eosinophil and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2
    • absolute eosinophil and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3
    • absolute lymphocyte count and active disease: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
    • absolute lymphocyte count and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • absolute lymphocyte count and los angeles: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count and los angeles medical center: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count and low resource: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count and low resource setting: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count blood cell count and acute respiratory syndrome: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count blood cell count and logistic regression: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count blood cell count and los angeles: 1
    • absolute lymphocyte count blood cell count and los angeles medical center: 1