The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learning from imbalanced data in surveillance of nosocomial infection
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE An important problem that arises in hospitals is the monitoring and detection of nosocomial or hospital acquired infections (NIs). This paper describes a retrospective analysis of a prevalence survey of NIs done in the Geneva University Hospital. Our goal is to identify patients with one or more NIs on the basis of clinical and other data collected during the survey. METHODS AND MATERIAL Standard surveillance strategies are time-consuming and cannot be applied hospital-wide; alternative methods are required. In NI detection viewed as a classification task, the main difficulty resides in the significant imbalance between positive or infected (11%) and negative (89%) cases. To remedy class imbalance, we explore two distinct avenues: (1) a new re-sampling approach in which both over-sampling of rare positives and under-sampling of the noninfected majority rely on synthetic cases (prototypes) generated via class-specific sub-clustering, and (2) a support vector algorithm in which asymmetrical margins are tuned to improve recognition of rare positive cases. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION Experiments have shown both approaches to be effective for the NI detection problem. Our novel re-sampling strategies perform remarkably better than classical random re-sampling. However, they are outperformed by asymmetrical soft margin support vector machines which attained a sensitivity rate of 92%, significantly better than the highest sensitivity (87%) obtained via prototype-based re-sampling.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cortes, C., & Vapnik, V. (1995) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00994018 · Cited by 59,421
SMOTE synthetic minority over-sampling technique
Chawla, N. V., Bowyer, K. W., Hall, L. O., & Kegelmeyer, W. P. (2002) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.953 · Cited by 32,865
The class imbalance problem: A systematic study1
Japkowicz, N., & Stephen, S. (2002) · Intelligent Data Analysis · doi:10.3233/ida-2002-6504 · Cited by 3,295
Cited by
A Survey of Predictive Modeling on Imbalanced Domains
Branco, P., Torgo, L., & Ribeiro, R. P. (2017) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/2907070 · Cited by 1,129
Evolutionary Undersampling for Classification with Imbalanced Datasets: Proposals and Taxonomy
García, S., & Herrera, F. (2009) · Evolutionary Computation · doi:10.1162/evco.2009.17.3.275 · Cited by 414
Walsh, C., & Hripcsak, G. (2014) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2014.08.006 · Cited by 75
Prediction of $$\beta $$-Thalassemia carriers using complete blood count features
Rustam, F., Ashraf, I., Jabbar, S., Tutusaus, K., Mazas, C., Barrera, A. E. P., & de la Torre Diez, I. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-22011-8 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Cohen, G., Hilario, M., Sax, H., Hugonnet, S., & Geissbuhler, A.
- Venue
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-05
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 7-18
- ISSN
- 0933-3657 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2040260156
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Learning from imbalanced data in surveillance of nosocomial infection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.artmed.2005.03.002
- The paper
- Cohen, G., Hilario, M., Sax, H., Hugonnet, S., & Geissbuhler, A. (2006). Learning from imbalanced data in surveillance of nosocomial infection. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2005.03.002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.