AI-MARRVEL — A Knowledge-Driven AI System for Diagnosing Mendelian Disorders
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Diagnosing genetic disorders requires extensive manual curation and interpretation of candidate variants, a labor-intensive task even for trained geneticists. Although artificial intelligence (AI) shows promise in aiding these diagnoses, existing AI tools have only achieved moderate success for primary diagnosis. METHODS: AI-MARRVEL (AIM) uses a random-forest machine-learning classifier trained on over 3.5 million variants from thousands of diagnosed cases. AIM additionally incorporates expert-engineered features into training to recapitulate the intricate decision-making processes in molecular diagnosis. The online version of AIM is available at https://ai.marrvel.org. To evaluate AIM, we benchmarked it with diagnosed patients from three independent cohorts. RESULTS: AIM improved the rate of accurate genetic diagnosis, doubling the number of solved cases as compared with benchmarked methods, across three distinct real-world cohorts. To better identify diagnosable cases from the unsolved pools accumulated over time, we designed a confidence metric on which AIM achieved a precision rate of 98% and identified 57% of diagnosable cases out of a collection of 871 cases. Furthermore, AIM's performance improved after being fine-tuned for targeted settings including recessive disorders and trio analysis. Finally, AIM demonstrated potential for novel disease gene discovery by correctly predicting two newly reported disease genes from the Undiagnosed Diseases Network. CONCLUSIONS: AIM achieved superior accuracy compared with existing methods for genetic diagnosis. We anticipate that this tool may aid in primary diagnosis, reanalysis of unsolved cases, and the discovery of novel disease genes. (Funded by the NIH Common Fund and others.).
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There are limited approaches for phenotype-based diagnosis, and none automatically learn phenotypic and/or genotypic features over patient phenotype terms.
“While deep learning approaches exist for image-based diagnosis10,11, there are limited approaches for phenotype-based diagnosis, and none automatically learn phenotypic and/or genotypic features over patient phenotype terms23–28,44.”
From Few shot learning for phenotype-driven diagnosis of patients with rare genetic diseases (2025) · cites this paper as [23]
The Introduction (page unavailable) lists several phenotype-informed diagnostic tools and says they often have limited accuracy, supporting a general concern about existing approaches. It does not say that few such approaches exist or that none automatically learn phenotypic or genotypic features from patient phenotype terms; those specific assertions are unsupported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 51
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J Mach Learn Res 2011;12:2825-2830.
- Authors
- Mao, D., Liu, C., Wang, L., AI-Ouran, R., Deisseroth, C., Pasupuleti, S., Kim, S. Y., Li, L., Rosenfeld, J. A., Meng, L., Burrage, L. C., Wangler, M. F., Yamamoto, S., Santana, M., Perez, V., Shukla, P., Eng, C. M., Lee, B., Yuan, B., Xia, F., Bellen, H. J., Liu, P., & Liu, Z.
- Affiliations
- Baylor College of Medicine (US)
- Baylor Genetics, Houston
- Baylor Genetics (US)
- Corresponding author
- Yamamoto, Shinya
- ORCID
- Mao, Dongxue
- Liu, Chaozhong
- Wang, Linhua
- AI-Ouran, Rami
- Deisseroth, Cole
- Pasupuleti, Sasidhar
- Kim, Seon Young
- Li, Lucian
- Rosenfeld, Jill A.
- Meng, Linyan
- Burrage, Lindsay C.
- Wangler, Michael F.
- Yamamoto, Shinya
- Santana, Michael
- Perez, Victor
- Shukla, Priyank
- Eng, Christine M.
- Lee, Brendan
- Yuan, Bo
- Xia, Fan
- Bellen, Hugo J.
- Liu, Pengfei
- Liu, Zhandong
- Venue
- NEJM AI
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2024-04-25
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 5
- ISSN
- 2836-9386 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11221788
- OpenAlex
- W4395451593
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 6
- FWCI
- 13.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- NEJM AI (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Digital Commons-TMC (Texas Medical Center) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Texas Children's Hospital
- Huffington Foundation
- National Institutes of Health (NS093793)
- National Human Genome Research Institute (U01HG010218, U01HG007709, U01HG007943, U01HG007703, U01HG007530, U01HG007674, U01HG007942, U01HG007708, U01HG007672, R35HG011311, R01HG011795)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (U54NS093793)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P50HD103555)
- Common Fund (U01HG010218, U01HG007530, U01HG007709, U01HG007672, U01HG007942, U01HG007708, U01HG007943, U54NS093793, U01 HG007703)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
- Keywords
- monogenic disorders, genetic diagnosis, random forest, variant interpretation, unsolved cases, recessive disorders, trio analysis, Undiagnosed Diseases Network
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