Cited by 162Artificial Intelligence in HealthcareClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlMachine Learning in Healthcare

Using Machine Learning to Predict Laboratory Test Results

Luo, Yuan, Szolovits, Peter, Dighe, Anand S, Baron, Jason M·2016·American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Abstract

Objectives While clinical laboratories report most test results as individual numbers, findings, or observations, clinical diagnosis usually relies on the results of multiple tests. Clinical decision support that integrates multiple elements of laboratory data could be highly useful in enhancing laboratory diagnosis. Methods Using the analyte ferritin in a proof of concept, we extracted clinical laboratory data from patient testing and applied a variety of machine-learning algorithms to predict ferritin test results using the results from other tests. We compared predicted with measured results and reviewed selected cases to assess the clinical value of predicted ferritin. Results We show that patient demographics and results of other laboratory tests can discriminate normal from abnormal ferritin results with a high degree of accuracy (area under the curve as high as 0.97, held-out test data). Case review indicated that predicted ferritin results may sometimes better reflect underlying iron status than measured ferritin. Conclusions These findings highlight the substantial informational redundancy present in patient test results and offer a potential foundation for a novel type of clinical decision support aimed at integrating, interpreting, and enhancing the diagnostic value of multianalyte sets of clinical laboratory test results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ajcp/aqw064

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Missing data were usually ignored by dropping data or imputing, and if not dealt with appropriately can skew the results.

    “Missing data were usually ignored by dropping data or imputing, if not dealt with appropriately can skew the results68,106,173.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 17 · Cited by 162

Authors
Luo, Y., Szolovits, P., Dighe, A. S., & Baron, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Baron, Jason M
Venue
American Journal of Clinical Pathology
Published
2016-06-01
Volume
145
Issue
6
Pages
778-788
ISSN
  • 0002-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-7722
OpenAlex
W2468477102
Cited by
162
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4
FWCI
19.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Pathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
ferritin, clinical decision support, iron status, laboratory diagnosis, machine learning prediction, clinical laboratory data
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Decision Support Techniques, Female, Ferritins, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Decision Support Systems, Clinical

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