Artificial Intelligence for Pre-Anaemic Iron Deficiency Detection Using Rich Complete Blood Count Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Iron deficiency (ID) is a major contributor to global disease burden and the leading cause of anaemia. Early detection is important for proactive management, but conventional complete blood count (CBC) screening often fails to identify non-anaemic iron deficiency (NAID) as many individuals maintain haemoglobin and red cell indices within reference ranges. Analysing 153,565 subjects from the INTERVAL, COMPARE and STRIDES studies, we show that CBC screening has only 40.5 % sensitivity for ID detection, falling to 21.9 % for NAID, highlighting a detection gap. CBC analysers generate a wealth of data beyond Electronic Health Record CBC parameters. We demonstrate that artificial intelligence applied to single-cell flow cytometry data from the CBC analyser achieves 83.7 % sensitivity for ID and 79.3 % for NAID. Our findings show that AI can greatly improve detection of a high-prevalence, important condition without changing infrastructure or diagnostic pathways, providing a valuable tool for proactive anaemia management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".