Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastroenterol. Jun 21, 2025; 31(23): 106836
Published online Jun 21, 2025. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i23.106836
Published online Jun 21, 2025. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i23.106836
Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies
Ref. | Journal | Country | Sample size | Sex (male:female) | IBS | Control | Biomarker | AI used | Specificity | Sensitivity | Accuracy | AUC |
Shepherd et al[17], 2014 | J Breath Res | United Kingdom | 80 | 34 | 46 | Gas chromatography | Artificial neural network analyses | 0.54 | ||||
Aggio et al[18], 2017 | Aliment Pharmacol Ther | United Kingdom | 69 | 26:43 | 28 | 41 | Gas chromatography | ML (SVM) | 0.91 | |||
Mao et al[19], 2020 | Hum Brain Mapp | China | 68 | 34:34 | 34 | 34 | Neuroimaging, HF | ML (SVM) | HF: 0.671, 0.806, 0.529; all: 0.750 | HF: 0.626, 0.438, 0.668; all: 0.679 | HF: 0.649, 0.619, 0.599; all: 0.715 | HF: 0.708, 0.659, 0.61; all: 0.776 |
Fukui et al[8], 2020 | J Clin Med | Japan | 111 | 46:65 | 85 | 26 | Gut microbiome | ML (random forest model) | > 0.90 | > 0.80 | 0.846 | |
Su et al[9], 2022 | Nat Commun | China | 1038 | 145 | 893 | Gut microbiome | ML (random forests, k-nearest neighbors, SVM multi-layer perceptron and SVM) | 0.98 | 0.94 | 0.98 | 0.99 | |
Tanaka et al[20], 2023 | Front Microbiol | Japan | 70 | 70:0 | 35 | 35 | Protease activity, C-terminal residue of K, R, S, or G, all probes, microbiome, and metabolome | ML (random forest model) | Protease activity: 0.727, and all probes: 0.909 | Protease activity: 0.81, and all probes: 0.905 | Protease activity: 0.83, all probes: 0.92, microbiome: 0.58, metabolome: 0.67 |
Table 2 Quality assessment of the included studies
Ref. | Diagnostic accuracy | Machine learning | ||||||||||
Patient selection1 | Index test1 | Reference standard1 | Flow & timing1 | Predictors2 | Outcomes2 | Analysis2 | Data processing3 | Model specification3 | Training/validation3 | Performance metrics3 | Transparency3 | |
Shepherd et al[17] | 0 (clinic-based sample) | 1 (ANN model) | 1 (Rome II) | 0 (no external validation) | 1 (ANN) | 1 (Rome II) | 1 (cross-validation used) | 1 (time binning and normalization) | 1 (ANN model with hidden layers) | 1 (4-fold cross-validation) | 1 (sensitivity, specificity calculated) | 0 (limited code transparency) |
Aggio et al[18] | 1 (diverse control) | 1 (SVM and PLS pipeline) | 1 (CRP and WCC levels) | 1 (partial external validation) | 1 (SVM) | 1 (definition) | 1 (multiple CV methods for robustness) | 1 (normalized gas values) | 1 (SVM with PLS setup) | 1 (Monte Carlo and 10-fold cross-validation) | 1 (ROC, sensitivity) | 0 (no full code access) |
Mao et al[19] | 0 (specific IBS subtypes) | 1 (multi-class SVM based on ROIs) | 1 (Rome IV) | 0 (no external validation) | 1 (SVM) | 1 (Rome IV) | 0 (limited test sets) | 1 (SPM preprocessing for ROIs) | 1 (SVM for IBS classification) | 1 (10-fold cross-validation) | 1 (AUC, sensitivity, specificity) | 0 (limited data sharing) |
Fukui et al[8] | 1 (multicenter approach) | 1 (RF and KNN models) | 1 (Rome IV and histological standards) | 0 (no external validation) | 1 (adjusted predictors) | 1 (Rome IV and histological standards) | 0 (no external testing) | 1 (batch effect adjustment) | 1 (RF and KNN classifiers) | 1 (nested CV) | 1 (AUC and AUPR) | 1 (full settings provided, partial sharing) |
Su et al[9] | 1 (matched control) | 1 (RF model) | 1 (standard enzyme-linked diagnosis) | 1 (robust cross-validation) | 1 (enzyme activity focus) | 1 (enzyme-based diagnosis) | 1 (5-fold cross-validation) | 1 (normalization for enzyme analysis) | 1 (RF model with grid search) | 1 (5-fold cross-validation) | 1 (comprehensive ROC analysis) | 1 (standard software in R) |
Tanaka et al[20] | 1 (broad sample selection) | 1 (RF validated with Bray-Curtis) | 1 (Rome IV and microbial standards) | 1 (rigorous cross-validation | 1 (RF) | 1 (Rome IV for microbial analysis) | 1 (external validation) | 1 (Bray-Curtis dissimilarity for microbiome) | 1 (RF validated externally) | 1 (nested CV with external testing) | 1 (AUROC and AUPR) | 1 (code and dataset on GitHub) |
- Citation: Bhagavathula AS, Al Qady AM, Aldhaleei WA. Diagnostic accuracy and quality of artificial intelligence models in irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review. World J Gastroenterol 2025; 31(23): 106836
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v31/i23/106836.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v31.i23.106836