| Literature DB >> 32508907 |
Jun Zhan1, Wen Chen2, Longsheng Cheng1, Qiong Wang2, Feifei Han2, Yubao Cui2.
Abstract
Intelligent medical diagnosis has become common in the era of big data, although this technique has been applied to asthma only in limited contexts. Using routine blood biomarkers to identify asthma patients would make clinical diagnosis easier to implement and would enhance research of key asthma variables through data mining techniques. We used routine blood data from healthy individuals to construct a Mahalanobis space (MS). Then, we calculated Mahalanobis distances of the training routine blood data from 355 asthma patients and 1,480 healthy individuals to ensure the efficiency of MS. Orthogonal arrays and signal-to-noise ratios were used to optimize blood biomarker variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the threshold value. Ultimately, we validated the system on 182 individuals based on the threshold value. Out of 35 patients with asthma, MTS correctly classified 94.15% of patients. In addition, 97.20% of 147 healthy individuals were correctly classified. The system isolated 7 routine blood biomarkers. Among these biomarkers, platelet distribution width, mean platelet volume, white blood cell count, eosinophil count, and lymphocyte ratio performed well in asthma diagnosis. In brief, MTS shows promise as an accurate method to identify asthma patients based on 7 vital blood biomarker variables and threshold determined by the ROC curve, thus offering the potential to simplify diagnostic complexity and optimize clinical efficiency.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32508907 PMCID: PMC7244973 DOI: 10.1155/2020/8841002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Basic characteristics of the study population.
| Category |
| Age, years ( | Sex ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | F | |||
| Asthma | 355 | 39.14 ± 22.60 | 175 (49.3%) | 180 (50.7%) |
| Healthy | 1,480 | 40.77 ± 12.71 | 763 (51.55%) | 717 (48.45%) |
Pearson correlation of selected variables.
| Variable A | Variable B | Pearson correlation | Reserved variable | Variable A | Variable B | Pearson correlation (%) | Reserved variable |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BA | BA# | 80.5 | BA# | LY | NE | 94.9 | LY |
| EO | EO# | 94.3 | EO# | MCH | MCV | 96.4 | MCH |
| HCT | HGB | 98.8 | HGB | NE# | WBC | 90.5 | WBC |
| HCT | RBC | 85.8 | RBC | PCT | PLT | 86.5 | PCT |
| HGB | RBC | 81.3 | RBC |
Figure 1The flowchart of rolling bearing fault diagnosis.
Figure 2Mahalanobis distance (MD) for normal (healthy) and abnormal (asthma) samples.
Orthogonal arrays (OAs) and signal-to-noise (SN) ratios for 14 variables.
| No. | BA# | EO# | LY | LY# | MCH | MCHC | MO | MO# | MPV | PDW | PLT | RBC | RDW | WBC | SN ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.29 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3.36 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 8.38 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3.10 |
| 5 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2.94 |
| 6 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7.87 |
| 7 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2.98 |
| 8 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 7.16 |
| 9 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 8.40 |
| 10 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3.54 |
| 11 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 7.34 |
| 12 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3.70 |
| 13 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2.10 |
| 14 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 9.36 |
| 15 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2.72 |
| 16 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 8.50 |
|
| 5.51 | 5.76 | 5.73 | 5.74 | 5.59 | 5.61 | 5.54 | 5.40 | 5.96 | 8.16 | 5.48 | 5.53 | 5.56 | 5.80 | |
|
| 5.71 | 5.45 | 5.48 | 5.49 | 5.62 | 5.60 | 5.68 | 5.83 | 5.26 | 3.05 | 5.75 | 5.70 | 5.66 | 5.41 | |
| Gain | −0.20 | 0.31 | 0.25 | 0.25 | −0.03 | 0.01 | −0.14 | −0.43 | 0.70 | 5.11 | −0.27 | −0.17 | −0.10 | 0.39 |
Figure 3Mahalanobis space optimization results for selected variables using signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).
Figure 4ROC curve.
Figure 5Variable importance scores from the support vector machine model.
Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of algorithms.
| MTS with 7 variables (%) | SVM with 14 variables (%) | SVM with 7 variables (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Se | 94.15 | 92.20 | 93.55 |
| Sp | 97.20 | 96.32 | 96.80 |