A Patient-Centered Proposal for Bayesian Analysis of Self-Experiments for Health.

IF 5.9 Q1 Computer Science
Jessica Schroeder, Ravi Karkar, James Fogarty, Julie A Kientz, Sean A Munson, Matthew Kay
{"title":"A Patient-Centered Proposal for Bayesian Analysis of Self-Experiments for Health.","authors":"Jessica Schroeder, Ravi Karkar, James Fogarty, Julie A Kientz, Sean A Munson, Matthew Kay","doi":"10.1007/s41666-018-0033-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rise of affordable sensors and apps has enabled people to monitor various health indicators via self-tracking. This trend encourages self-experimentation, a subset of self-tracking in which a person systematically explores potential causal relationships to try to answer questions about their health. Although recent research has investigated how to support the data collection necessary for self-experiments, less research has considered the best way to analyze data resulting from these self-experiments. Most tools default to using traditional frequentist methods. However, the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality recommends using Bayesian analysis for n-of-1 studies, arguing from a statistical perspective. To develop a complementary patient-centered perspective on the potential benefits of Bayesian analysis, this paper describes types of questions people want to answer via self-experimentation, as informed by 1) our experiences engaging with irritable bowel syndrome patients and their healthcare providers and 2) a survey investigating what questions individuals want to answer about their health and wellness. We provide examples of how those questions might be answered using 1) frequentist null hypothesis significance testing, 2) frequentist estimation, and 3) Bayesian estimation and prediction. We then provide design recommendations for analyses and visualizations that could help people answer and interpret such questions. We find the majority of the questions people want to answer with self-tracking data are better answered with Bayesian methods than with frequentist methods. Our results therefore provide patient-centered support for the use of Bayesian analysis for n-of-1 studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":36444,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":"3 1","pages":"124-155"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6398612/pdf/41666_2018_Article_33.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41666-018-0033-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/9/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Computer Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rise of affordable sensors and apps has enabled people to monitor various health indicators via self-tracking. This trend encourages self-experimentation, a subset of self-tracking in which a person systematically explores potential causal relationships to try to answer questions about their health. Although recent research has investigated how to support the data collection necessary for self-experiments, less research has considered the best way to analyze data resulting from these self-experiments. Most tools default to using traditional frequentist methods. However, the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality recommends using Bayesian analysis for n-of-1 studies, arguing from a statistical perspective. To develop a complementary patient-centered perspective on the potential benefits of Bayesian analysis, this paper describes types of questions people want to answer via self-experimentation, as informed by 1) our experiences engaging with irritable bowel syndrome patients and their healthcare providers and 2) a survey investigating what questions individuals want to answer about their health and wellness. We provide examples of how those questions might be answered using 1) frequentist null hypothesis significance testing, 2) frequentist estimation, and 3) Bayesian estimation and prediction. We then provide design recommendations for analyses and visualizations that could help people answer and interpret such questions. We find the majority of the questions people want to answer with self-tracking data are better answered with Bayesian methods than with frequentist methods. Our results therefore provide patient-centered support for the use of Bayesian analysis for n-of-1 studies.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

以患者为中心的健康自我实验贝叶斯分析提案。
价格低廉的传感器和应用程序的兴起,使人们能够通过自我跟踪来监测各种健康指标。这种趋势鼓励人们进行自我实验,自我实验是自我跟踪的一个子集,在自我跟踪中,人们系统地探索潜在的因果关系,试图回答有关自己健康的问题。尽管最近的研究已经调查了如何支持自我实验所需的数据收集,但较少研究考虑分析这些自我实验所产生的数据的最佳方法。大多数工具默认使用传统的频数法。然而,美国医疗保健研究与质量机构从统计学角度出发,建议对 n-of-1 研究使用贝叶斯分析法。为了对贝叶斯分析的潜在益处形成以患者为中心的补充观点,本文介绍了人们希望通过自我实验回答的问题类型,这些问题来自于:1)我们与肠易激综合征患者及其医疗保健提供者接触的经验;2)一项调查,调查个人希望回答哪些有关其健康和保健的问题。我们举例说明如何使用以下方法回答这些问题:1)频数主义零假设显著性检验;2)频数主义估计;3)贝叶斯估计和预测。然后,我们提供了分析和可视化的设计建议,以帮助人们回答和解释这些问题。我们发现,人们想用自我追踪数据回答的大多数问题,用贝叶斯方法都比用频繁法更好。因此,我们的结果为在 n-of-1 研究中使用贝叶斯分析法提供了以患者为中心的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research
Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research Computer Science-Computer Science Applications
CiteScore
13.60
自引率
1.70%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research serves as a publication venue for the innovative technical contributions highlighting analytics, systems, and human factors research in healthcare informatics.Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research is concerned with the application of computer science principles, information science principles, information technology, and communication technology to address problems in healthcare, and everyday wellness. Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research highlights the most cutting-edge technical contributions in computing-oriented healthcare informatics.  The journal covers three major tracks: (1) analytics—focuses on data analytics, knowledge discovery, predictive modeling; (2) systems—focuses on building healthcare informatics systems (e.g., architecture, framework, design, engineering, and application); (3) human factors—focuses on understanding users or context, interface design, health behavior, and user studies of healthcare informatics applications.   Topics include but are not limited to: ·         healthcare software architecture, framework, design, and engineering;·         electronic health records·         medical data mining·         predictive modeling·         medical information retrieval·         medical natural language processing·         healthcare information systems·         smart health and connected health·         social media analytics·         mobile healthcare·         medical signal processing·         human factors in healthcare·         usability studies in healthcare·         user-interface design for medical devices and healthcare software·         health service delivery·         health games·         security and privacy in healthcare·         medical recommender system·         healthcare workflow management·         disease profiling and personalized treatment·         visualization of medical data·         intelligent medical devices and sensors·         RFID solutions for healthcare·         healthcare decision analytics and support systems·         epidemiological surveillance systems and intervention modeling·         consumer and clinician health information needs, seeking, sharing, and use·         semantic Web, linked data, and ontology·         collaboration technologies for healthcare·         assistive and adaptive ubiquitous computing technologies·         statistics and quality of medical data·         healthcare delivery in developing countries·         health systems modeling and simulation·         computer-aided diagnosis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信