利用机器学习识别接受家庭护理评估的老年人的虚弱程度:关于分类器、特征选择和样本量作用的纵向观察研究。

JMIR AI Pub Date : 2024-01-31 DOI:10.2196/44185
Cheng Pan, Hao Luo, Gary Cheung, Huiquan Zhou, Reynold Cheng, Sarah Cullum, Chuan Wu
{"title":"利用机器学习识别接受家庭护理评估的老年人的虚弱程度:关于分类器、特征选择和样本量作用的纵向观察研究。","authors":"Cheng Pan, Hao Luo, Gary Cheung, Huiquan Zhou, Reynold Cheng, Sarah Cullum, Chuan Wu","doi":"10.2196/44185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Machine learning techniques are starting to be used in various health care data sets to identify frail persons who may benefit from interventions. However, evidence about the performance of machine learning techniques compared to conventional regression is mixed. It is also unclear what methodological and database factors are associated with performance.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the mortality prediction accuracy of various machine learning classifiers for identifying frail older adults in different scenarios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used deidentified data collected from older adults (65 years of age and older) assessed with interRAI-Home Care instrument in New Zealand between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016. A total of 138 interRAI assessment items were used to predict 6-month and 12-month mortality, using 3 machine learning classifiers (random forest [RF], extreme gradient boosting [XGBoost], and multilayer perceptron [MLP]) and regularized logistic regression. We conducted a simulation study comparing the performance of machine learning models with logistic regression and interRAI Home Care Frailty Scale and examined the effects of sample sizes, the number of features, and train-test split ratios.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 95,042 older adults (median age 82.66 years, IQR 77.92-88.76; n=37,462, 39.42% male) receiving home care were analyzed. The average area under the curve (AUC) and sensitivities of 6-month mortality prediction showed that machine learning classifiers did not outperform regularized logistic regressions. In terms of AUC, regularized logistic regression had better performance than XGBoost, MLP, and RF when the number of features was ≤80 and the sample size ≤16,000; MLP outperformed regularized logistic regression in terms of sensitivities when the number of features was ≥40 and the sample size ≥4000. Conversely, RF and XGBoost demonstrated higher specificities than regularized logistic regression in all scenarios.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study revealed that machine learning models exhibited significant variation in prediction performance when evaluated using different metrics. Regularized logistic regression was an effective model for identifying frail older adults receiving home care, as indicated by the AUC, particularly when the number of features and sample sizes were not excessively large. Conversely, MLP displayed superior sensitivity, while RF exhibited superior specificity when the number of features and sample sizes were large.</p>","PeriodicalId":73551,"journal":{"name":"JMIR AI","volume":"3 ","pages":"e44185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11041467/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying Frailty in Older Adults Receiving Home Care Assessment Using Machine Learning: Longitudinal Observational Study on the Role of Classifier, Feature Selection, and Sample Size.\",\"authors\":\"Cheng Pan, Hao Luo, Gary Cheung, Huiquan Zhou, Reynold Cheng, Sarah Cullum, Chuan Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/44185\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Machine learning techniques are starting to be used in various health care data sets to identify frail persons who may benefit from interventions. However, evidence about the performance of machine learning techniques compared to conventional regression is mixed. It is also unclear what methodological and database factors are associated with performance.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the mortality prediction accuracy of various machine learning classifiers for identifying frail older adults in different scenarios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used deidentified data collected from older adults (65 years of age and older) assessed with interRAI-Home Care instrument in New Zealand between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016. A total of 138 interRAI assessment items were used to predict 6-month and 12-month mortality, using 3 machine learning classifiers (random forest [RF], extreme gradient boosting [XGBoost], and multilayer perceptron [MLP]) and regularized logistic regression. We conducted a simulation study comparing the performance of machine learning models with logistic regression and interRAI Home Care Frailty Scale and examined the effects of sample sizes, the number of features, and train-test split ratios.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 95,042 older adults (median age 82.66 years, IQR 77.92-88.76; n=37,462, 39.42% male) receiving home care were analyzed. The average area under the curve (AUC) and sensitivities of 6-month mortality prediction showed that machine learning classifiers did not outperform regularized logistic regressions. In terms of AUC, regularized logistic regression had better performance than XGBoost, MLP, and RF when the number of features was ≤80 and the sample size ≤16,000; MLP outperformed regularized logistic regression in terms of sensitivities when the number of features was ≥40 and the sample size ≥4000. Conversely, RF and XGBoost demonstrated higher specificities than regularized logistic regression in all scenarios.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study revealed that machine learning models exhibited significant variation in prediction performance when evaluated using different metrics. Regularized logistic regression was an effective model for identifying frail older adults receiving home care, as indicated by the AUC, particularly when the number of features and sample sizes were not excessively large. Conversely, MLP displayed superior sensitivity, while RF exhibited superior specificity when the number of features and sample sizes were large.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73551,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR AI\",\"volume\":\"3 \",\"pages\":\"e44185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11041467/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR AI\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/44185\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR AI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/44185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:机器学习技术已开始用于各种医疗数据集,以识别可能受益于干预措施的体弱者。然而,与传统回归法相比,机器学习技术的性能参差不齐。目前还不清楚哪些方法和数据库因素与机器学习技术的性能有关:本研究旨在比较各种机器学习分类器在不同情况下识别虚弱老年人的死亡率预测准确性:我们使用了从 2012 年 1 月 1 日至 2016 年 12 月 31 日期间在新西兰使用 interRAI-Home Care 仪器评估的老年人(65 岁及以上)的去身份化数据。我们使用 3 种机器学习分类器(随机森林 [RF]、极梯度提升 [XGBoost] 和多层感知器 [MLP])和正则化逻辑回归,对总共 138 个 interRAI 评估项目预测 6 个月和 12 个月的死亡率。我们进行了一项模拟研究,比较了机器学习模型与逻辑回归和 interRAI 家庭护理虚弱量表的性能,并考察了样本大小、特征数量和训练-测试分割比率的影响:共分析了 95,042 名接受家庭护理的老年人(中位年龄 82.66 岁,IQR 77.92-88.76;n=37,462,39.42% 为男性)。6 个月死亡率预测的平均曲线下面积(AUC)和灵敏度显示,机器学习分类器的效果并不优于正则化逻辑回归。就AUC而言,当特征数≤80且样本量≤16000时,正则化逻辑回归的性能优于XGBoost、MLP和RF;当特征数≥40且样本量≥4000时,MLP的灵敏度优于正则化逻辑回归。相反,RF 和 XGBoost 在所有情况下都比正则逻辑回归表现出更高的特异性:研究表明,在使用不同指标进行评估时,机器学习模型在预测性能方面表现出显著差异。从 AUC 值来看,正则化逻辑回归是识别接受家庭护理的体弱老年人的有效模型,尤其是在特征数量和样本量不过大的情况下。相反,当特征数量和样本量较大时,MLP 表现出更高的灵敏度,而 RF 则表现出更高的特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identifying Frailty in Older Adults Receiving Home Care Assessment Using Machine Learning: Longitudinal Observational Study on the Role of Classifier, Feature Selection, and Sample Size.

Background: Machine learning techniques are starting to be used in various health care data sets to identify frail persons who may benefit from interventions. However, evidence about the performance of machine learning techniques compared to conventional regression is mixed. It is also unclear what methodological and database factors are associated with performance.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the mortality prediction accuracy of various machine learning classifiers for identifying frail older adults in different scenarios.

Methods: We used deidentified data collected from older adults (65 years of age and older) assessed with interRAI-Home Care instrument in New Zealand between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016. A total of 138 interRAI assessment items were used to predict 6-month and 12-month mortality, using 3 machine learning classifiers (random forest [RF], extreme gradient boosting [XGBoost], and multilayer perceptron [MLP]) and regularized logistic regression. We conducted a simulation study comparing the performance of machine learning models with logistic regression and interRAI Home Care Frailty Scale and examined the effects of sample sizes, the number of features, and train-test split ratios.

Results: A total of 95,042 older adults (median age 82.66 years, IQR 77.92-88.76; n=37,462, 39.42% male) receiving home care were analyzed. The average area under the curve (AUC) and sensitivities of 6-month mortality prediction showed that machine learning classifiers did not outperform regularized logistic regressions. In terms of AUC, regularized logistic regression had better performance than XGBoost, MLP, and RF when the number of features was ≤80 and the sample size ≤16,000; MLP outperformed regularized logistic regression in terms of sensitivities when the number of features was ≥40 and the sample size ≥4000. Conversely, RF and XGBoost demonstrated higher specificities than regularized logistic regression in all scenarios.

Conclusions: The study revealed that machine learning models exhibited significant variation in prediction performance when evaluated using different metrics. Regularized logistic regression was an effective model for identifying frail older adults receiving home care, as indicated by the AUC, particularly when the number of features and sample sizes were not excessively large. Conversely, MLP displayed superior sensitivity, while RF exhibited superior specificity when the number of features and sample sizes were large.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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