Review Article

Machine Learning for Pre-Test Malaria Diagnosis from Symptoms, Clinical Text and Speech: A PRISMA Systematic Review

ISSN 2979-8582  ·  Article No. 070

Olalekan Akinbosoye Okewale✉ Olufemi S. Ojo F. W. Ipeayeda Segun Kazeem Fatoki Mayowa Oyedepo Oyediran

Publication Details

Publication Date
10/11/2026
Volume / Issue
Vol 1, Issue 6 (2026)
Article No.
070
Journal
British Journal of Contemporary Research
Received
29 Oct 2026
Views
33
Downloads
12
Affiliations

Olalekan Akinbosoye Okewale: Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo, Nigeria

Olufemi S. Ojo: Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo, Nigeria

F. W. Ipeayeda: Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo, Nigeria

Segun Kazeem Fatoki: Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo, Nigeria

Mayowa Oyedepo Oyediran: Department of Computer Science, Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo, Nigeria

ORCID

Olalekan Akinbosoye Okewale 0000-0003-2272-8660

Olufemi S. Ojo 0000-0001-7505-7990

F. W. Ipeayeda 0009-0009-6055-9651

Segun Kazeem Fatoki 0009-0007-1921-1798

Mayowa Oyedepo Oyediran 0000-0001-6756-1476

Abstract

In the absence of microscopy and rapid tests, malaria diagnosis is presumptive in many clinics in Africa, leading to overuse of drugs and masking other causes of fever. It has been proposed, based on pre-test data (e.g., symptoms, clinical notes, patient voice), to use standard ML models as triage tools. We searched PubMed and Scopus for studies from 2010 to 2026 that trained and evaluated standard ML models on pre-test clinical data to paint a high RQ1 for malaria diagnosis or on voice or clinical text for other infectious diseases (RQ1) and followed PRISMA 2020. We included 146 studies (RQ1=43; RQ2=103) out of 2598 studies. A modified PROBAST assessed the risk of bias. No malaria studies used speech, and only four used free text or language models. Excluding laboratory reference standard, 27 (63%) out of 43 studies for malaria employed 95% or greater accuracy, found in 14 out of 17 studies. Those with laboratory labelling (and independent adjudications) found discrimination modest, with AUCs between 0.60–0.95. However, chance-level predictions were observed when new speakers, recording devices, and entirely new datasets were used; only 14 of 103 studies mention independent data. These data justify pre-test malaria triage only if subsequent models include parasitological classification, patient-level speaker-independent splits, symptom-matched controls, external validation, and combined and separate reporting from each input.

Keywords

Clinical Decision Support Malaria Machine Learning Natural Language Processing Speech Analysis Systematic Review

License

CC BY 4.0

This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License . Free to read, share, and adapt with attribution.

Cite This Article

Olalekan Akinbosoye Okewale, Olufemi S. Ojo, F. W. Ipeayeda, Segun Kazeem Fatoki, Mayowa Oyedepo Oyediran (2026). Machine Learning for Pre-Test Malaria Diagnosis from Symptoms, Clinical Text and Speech: A PRISMA Systematic Review. British Journal of Contemporary Research, 1(6), Article 070. https://doi.org/10.67693/BJCR-6RSBUMFE
Olalekan Akinbosoye Okewale. “Machine Learning for Pre-Test Malaria Diagnosis from Symptoms, Clinical Text and Speech: A PRISMA Systematic Review.” British Journal of Contemporary Research, vol. 1, no. 6, 2026.
Olalekan Akinbosoye Okewale. “Machine Learning for Pre-Test Malaria Diagnosis from Symptoms, Clinical Text and Speech: A PRISMA Systematic Review.” British Journal of Contemporary Research 1, no. 6.

Metadata

ISSN 2979-8582
DOI Prefix 10.67693
Tracking ID BEX_OCT_26_277

British Journal of Contemporary Research

Open Access · Peer Reviewed · Published by Bexford Publishing Ltd

Browse All Issues
Join Community