In the modern world, chronic kidney disease is one of the most severe diseases that negatively affects human life. It is becoming a growing problem in both developed and underdeveloped countries. An accurate and timely diagnosis of chronic kidney disease is vital in preventing and treating kidney failure. The diagnosis of chronic kidney disease through history has been considered unreliable in many respects. To classify healthy people and people with chronic kidney disease, non-invasive methods like machine learning models are reliable and efficient. In our current work, we predict chronic kidney disease using different machine learning models, including logistic, probit, random forest, decision tree, k-nearest neighbor, and support vector machine with four kernel functions (linear, Laplacian, Bessel, and radial basis kernels). The dataset is a record taken as a case–control study containing chronic kidney disease patients from district Buner, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. To compare the models in terms of classification and accuracy, we calculated different performance measures, including accuracy, Brier score, sensitivity, Youdent, specificity, and F1 score. The Diebold and Mariano test of comparable prediction accuracy was also conducted to determine whether there is a substantial difference in the accuracy measures of different predictive models. As confirmed by the results, the support vector machine with the Laplace kernel function outperforms all other models, while the random forest is competitive.

Predicting and modeling time-to-events data is a crucial and interesting research area. For modeling and predicting such types of data, numerous statistical models have been suggested and implemented. This study introduces a new statistical model, namely, a new modified flexible Weibull extension (NMFWE) distribution for modeling the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients. The introduced model is obtained by modifying the flexible Weibull extension model. The maximum likelihood estimators of the NMFWE model are obtained. The evaluation of the estimators of the NMFWE model is assessed in a simulation study. The flexibility and applicability of the NMFWE model are established by taking two datasets representing the mortality rates of COVID-19-infected persons in Mexico and Canada. For predictive modeling, we consider two pure statistical models and two machine learning (ML) algorithms. The pure statistical models include the autoregressive moving average (ARMA) and non-parametric autoregressive moving average (NP-ARMA), and the ML algorithms include neural network autoregression (NNAR) and support vector regression (SVR). To evaluate their forecasting performance, three standard measures of accuracy, namely, root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) are calculated. The findings demonstrate that ML algorithms are very effective at predicting the mortality rate data.

The rising number of confirmed cases and deaths in Pakistan caused by the coronavirus have caused problems in all areas of the country, not just healthcare. For accurate policy making, it is very important to have accurate and efficient predictions of confirmed cases and death counts. In this article, we use a coronavirus dataset that includes the number of deaths, confirmed cases, and recovered cases to test an artificial neural network model and compare it to different univariate time series models. In contrast to the artificial neural network model, we consider five univariate time series models to predict confirmed cases, deaths count, and recovered cases. The considered models are applied to Pakistan’s daily records of confirmed cases, deaths, and recovered cases from 10 March 2020 to 3 July 2020. Two statistical measures are considered to assess the performances of the models. In addition, a statistical test, namely, the Diebold and Mariano test, is implemented to check the accuracy of the mean errors. The results (mean error and statistical test) show that the artificial neural network model is better suited to predict death and recovered coronavirus cases. In addition, the moving average model outperforms all other confirmed case models, while the autoregressive moving average is the second-best model.