PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 19, 2026SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología0 citationsOpen Access

Machine learning models based on laboratory data: new insight into the differential diagnosis of tuberculous and viral meningitis

XHXiaoyan HaoYHYujiao HuLZLei Zhou

Key Points

  • This research aims to enhance the differentiation between tuberculous meningitis and viral meningitis using machine learning models.
  • Collected clinical and laboratory data from 558 participants with TBM and VM.
  • Employed resampling techniques to balance the dataset.
  • Utilized feature selection methods like RFECV-ADA and Boruta to identify key indicators.
  • Implemented supervised machine learning algorithms and evaluated model performance using various metrics.
  • Identified ten key features for differentiation, including glucose and protein levels in CSF.
  • ENN-XgBoost_V10 model achieved a sensitivity of 75.79% in distinguishing TBM from VM.
  • Model sensitivity improved to 81.45% in patients with specific CSF conditions.
  • Nomogram predictions closely matched actual outcomes according to calibration curve analysis.

Abstract

Background The differential diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis (TBM) and viral meningitis (VM) remains a formidable clinical challenge. This study aims to develop machine learning (ML) models and a nomogram for differentiating between TBM and VM. Methods Clinical and laboratory data were collected from 558 participants, including 190 TBM patients and 368 VM patients, treated between 2000 and 2024 at Xijing Hospital. Resampling techniques were employed to balance the dataset. Four feature selection methods (RFECV-ADA, Boruta, Spearman, MI) were utilized to identify potential indicators. Two supervised ML algorithms were implemented for model development. Model performance was evaluated with the area under the curve, as well as sensitivity (SEN), specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. The influence of each feature was visualized with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) diagrams. Finally, a nomogram was created from the selected features. Results Ten features were identified, including the mean corpuscular volume, hemoglobin, D-Dimer level, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) glucose, protein, immunoglobulin G, A, M, chloride, and albumin levels. The ENN-XgBoostV10 model demonstrated the highest SEN of 75. 79%, in differentiating TBM from VM and a SEN of 81. 45% in patients with at least five leucocytes per μL of CSF and a CSF-to-blood glucose ratio less than 0. 5. According to SHAP analysis, the significance of these features in prediction was underscored. Calibration curve analysis indicated that the nomogram predictions were relatively similar to the actual outcomes. Conclusions Based on ten routine laboratory tests, the ENN-XgBoostV10 model differentiates TBM from VM with superior SEN to traditional methods.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hao et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e470a4010ef96374d8d822https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2026.1791663
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper