↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic support for selected neuromuscular diseases using answer-pattern recognition and data mining techniques: a proof of concept multicenter prospective trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Diagnostic support for selected neuromuscular diseases using answer-pattern recognition and data mining techniques: a proof of concept multicenter prospective trial
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12911-016-0268-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorenz Grigull, Werner Lechner, Susanne Petri, Katja Kollewe, Reinhard Dengler, Sandra Mehmecke, Ulrike Schumacher, Thomas Lücke, Christiane Schneider-Gold, Cornelia Köhler, Anne-Katrin Güttsches, Xiaowei Kortum, Frank Klawonn

Abstract

Diagnosis of neuromuscular diseases in primary care is often challenging. Rare diseases such as Pompe disease are easily overlooked by the general practitioner. We therefore aimed to develop a diagnostic support tool using patient-oriented questions and combined data mining algorithms recognizing answer patterns in individuals with selected neuromuscular diseases. A multicenter prospective study for the proof of concept was conducted thereafter. First, 16 interviews with patients were conducted focusing on their pre-diagnostic observations and experiences. From these interviews, we developed a questionnaire with 46 items. Then, patients with diagnosed neuromuscular diseases as well as patients without such a disease answered the questionnaire to establish a database for data mining. For proof of concept, initially only six diagnoses were chosen (myotonic dystrophy and myotonia (MdMy), Pompe disease (MP), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), polyneuropathy (PNP), spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), other neuromuscular diseases, and no neuromuscular disease (NND). A prospective study was performed to validate the automated malleable system, which included six different classification methods combined in a fusion algorithm proposing a final diagnosis. Finally, new diagnoses were incorporated into the system. In total, questionnaires from 210 individuals were used to train the system. 89.5 % correct diagnoses were achieved during cross-validation. The sensitivity of the system was 93-97 % for individuals with MP, with MdMy and without neuromuscular diseases, but only 69 % in SMA and 81 % in ALS patients. In the prospective trial, 57/64 (89 %) diagnoses were predicted correctly by the computerized system. All questions, or rather all answers, increased the diagnostic accuracy of the system, with the best results reached by the fusion of different classifier methods. Receiver operating curve (ROC) and p-value analyses confirmed the results. A questionnaire-based diagnostic support tool using data mining methods exhibited good results in predicting selected neuromuscular diseases. Due to the variety of neuromuscular diseases, additional studies are required to measure beneficial effects in the clinical setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 62 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Other 6 9%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 34%
Engineering 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 15 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2016.
All research outputs
#13,503,893
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#888
of 2,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,901
of 301,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#18
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,030 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.