A Novel Biomarker-Based Decision Support System for Pediatric Appendicitis Diagnosis: A Comparative Study of Ensemble Models Algorithms
Özet
Introduction: Acute appendicitis is the commonest cause of surgical abdominal pain, yet diagnosis in children remains challenging; delays increase the risk of perforation, peritonitis and sepsis. We sought to develop a rapid, inexpensive and interpretable clinical-decision support system (CDSS) that leverages routine blood tests (RBT) to assist early paediatric triage. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective single-centre study (January 2020–December 2024) we analysed 275 emergency-department encounters for abdominal pain (75 histology-confirmed appendicitis, 200 controls). The six-stage pipeline comprised (1) cohort selection; (2) exploratory logistic-regression screening of RBT variables; (3) training of Random Forest, Gradient Boosting and LightGBM ensembles (with/without SMOTE) under 10 × 10 stratified cross-validation; (4) SHAP-based feature interpretation; (5) exhaustive generation of every two- and three-parameter arithmetic biomarker from seven RBT features; and (6) derivation of probability-threshold curves and a three-zone rule tree for the top biomarker. Performance was reported with accuracy (ACC), Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), AUC-ROC, sensitivity, specificity, F1-Score PPV and NPV. Results: Logistic regression and SHAP confirmed CRP, WBC and neutrophil count as strong positive predictors, whereas MPV and PDW were protective; PLT remained non-informative. All three ensemble classifiers surpassed 97% accuracy, 98% AUC-ROC and 0.93 MCC, with no gain from SMOTE. An extensive formula search, the best two-parameter marker was Neutrophil ÷ PDW (MCC = 0.73, specificity 95%). Its ensemble curve crosses P = 0.5 five times; practical cut-offs of < 0.633 (strongly indicate healthy) and > 0.794 (strongly indicate appendicitis) retain high NPV (∼91%) and PPV (∼86%). Among triple formulas that do not rely on PLT, the leading biomarker was CRP+WBC+Neutrophil (MCC = 0.85, PPV 92%, NPV 95%). The ensemble curve intersects at P = 0.5 at three points; values >27 strongly predict appendicitis, <23 indicates a healthy state, and values 23–27 leave a small uncertain band. A rule-based CDSS built on these two biomarkers correctly classified all controls (specificity 100%), sensitivity 95%, achieved 91% overall accuracy, and offers interpretable, electronic health records (EHRs)-ready cut-offs for paediatric appendicitis triage. Conclusion: Routine haematology-biochemistry data, interpreted through ensemble learning and engineered biomarkers, can deliver fast, transparent and highly accurate support for paediatric appendicitis triage. Given its zero false-positive rate, the proposed CDSS is best suited to in-hospital monitoring, where minimising false negatives is critical. Prospective multi-centre validation is warranted. © 2025 AGBM
Anahtar Kelimeler
Tam Kayıt
| Alan | Değer | Dil |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Avci, Veli | |
| dc.contributor.author | Huyut, Mehmet Tahir | |
| dc.contributor.author | Velichko, Andrei | |
| dc.contributor.author | Belyaev, Maksim | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-10-18T20:25:20.119955654Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-10-18T20:25:20.119955654Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2026 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Introduction: Acute appendicitis is the commonest cause of surgical abdominal pain, yet diagnosis in children remains challenging; delays increase the risk of perforation, peritonitis and sepsis. We sought to develop a rapid, inexpensive and interpretable clinical-decision support system (CDSS) that leverages routine blood tests (RBT) to assist early paediatric triage. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective single-centre study (January 2020–December 2024) we analysed 275 emergency-department encounters for abdominal pain (75 histology-confirmed appendicitis, 200 controls). The six-stage pipeline comprised (1) cohort selection; (2) exploratory logistic-regression screening of RBT variables; (3) training of Random Forest, Gradient Boosting and LightGBM ensembles (with/without SMOTE) under 10 × 10 stratified cross-validation; (4) SHAP-based feature interpretation; (5) exhaustive generation of every two- and three-parameter arithmetic biomarker from seven RBT features; and (6) derivation of probability-threshold curves and a three-zone rule tree for the top biomarker. Performance was reported with accuracy (ACC), Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), AUC-ROC, sensitivity, specificity, F1-Score PPV and NPV. Results: Logistic regression and SHAP confirmed CRP, WBC and neutrophil count as strong positive predictors, whereas MPV and PDW were protective; PLT remained non-informative. All three ensemble classifiers surpassed 97% accuracy, 98% AUC-ROC and 0.93 MCC, with no gain from SMOTE. An extensive formula search, the best two-parameter marker was Neutrophil ÷ PDW (MCC = 0.73, specificity 95%). Its ensemble curve crosses P = 0.5 five times; practical cut-offs of < 0.633 (strongly indicate healthy) and > 0.794 (strongly indicate appendicitis) retain high NPV (∼91%) and PPV (∼86%). Among triple formulas that do not rely on PLT, the leading biomarker was CRP+WBC+Neutrophil (MCC = 0.85, PPV 92%, NPV 95%). The ensemble curve intersects at P = 0.5 at three points; values >27 strongly predict appendicitis, <23 indicates a healthy state, and values 23–27 leave a small uncertain band. A rule-based CDSS built on these two biomarkers correctly classified all controls (specificity 100%), sensitivity 95%, achieved 91% overall accuracy, and offers interpretable, electronic health records (EHRs)-ready cut-offs for paediatric appendicitis triage. Conclusion: Routine haematology-biochemistry data, interpreted through ensemble learning and engineered biomarkers, can deliver fast, transparent and highly accurate support for paediatric appendicitis triage. Given its zero false-positive rate, the proposed CDSS is best suited to in-hospital monitoring, where minimising false negatives is critical. Prospective multi-centre validation is warranted. © 2025 AGBM | |
| dc.description.sponsorship | This research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (grant no. 22-11-00055-P , https://rscf.ru/en/project/22-11-00055/ , accessed on 10 June 2025). | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.irbm.2025.100921 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 1876-0988 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1959-0318 | |
| dc.identifier.issue | 1 | |
| dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-105022838729 | |
| dc.identifier.startpage | 100921 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/ebyu/10083 | |
| dc.identifier.volume | 47 | |
| dc.identifier.wos | WOS:001630920100001 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.publisher | Elsevier Masson s.r.l. | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | IRBM | |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
| dc.subject | Appendicitis | |
| dc.subject | Biomarkers | |
| dc.subject | Boosting and bagging based ensemble models | |
| dc.subject | Clinical decision support system (CDDS) | |
| dc.subject | SHAP | |
| dc.subject | SMOTE | |
| dc.subject | biological marker | |
| dc.subject | C reactive protein | |
| dc.subject | abdominal pain | |
| dc.subject | adolescent | |
| dc.subject | adult | |
| dc.subject | arithmetic | |
| dc.subject | Article | |
| dc.subject | child | |
| dc.subject | clinical decision support system | |
| dc.subject | cohort analysis | |
| dc.subject | comparative study | |
| dc.subject | correlation coefficient | |
| dc.subject | cross validation | |
| dc.subject | decision tree | |
| dc.subject | diagnostic accuracy | |
| dc.subject | diagnostic test accuracy study | |
| dc.subject | electronic health record | |
| dc.subject | emergency ward | |
| dc.subject | ensemble learning | |
| dc.subject | false negative result | |
| dc.subject | female | |
| dc.subject | histopathology | |
| dc.subject | human | |
| dc.subject | infant | |
| dc.title | A Novel Biomarker-Based Decision Support System for Pediatric Appendicitis Diagnosis: A Comparative Study of Ensemble Models Algorithms | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| rdl.citation.scopus | 0 | |
| rdl.citation.wos | 0 | |
| rdl.source.index | SCOPUS | |
| rdl.source.index | WOS | |
| rdl.wos.index | Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) |
