通过监督机器学习从生态瞬间评估和传感器数据中预测吸烟间隔:对及时适应性干预开发的影响。

PLOS digital health Pub Date : 2024-08-23 eCollection Date: 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000594
Olga Perski, Dimitra Kale, Corinna Leppin, Tosan Okpako, David Simons, Stephanie P Goldstein, Eric Hekler, Jamie Brown
{"title":"通过监督机器学习从生态瞬间评估和传感器数据中预测吸烟间隔:对及时适应性干预开发的影响。","authors":"Olga Perski, Dimitra Kale, Corinna Leppin, Tosan Okpako, David Simons, Stephanie P Goldstein, Eric Hekler, Jamie Brown","doi":"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000594","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Specific moments of lapse among smokers attempting to quit often lead to full relapse, which highlights a need for interventions that target lapses before they might occur, such as just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAIs). To inform the decision points and tailoring variables of a lapse prevention JITAI, we trained and tested supervised machine learning algorithms that use Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMAs) and wearable sensor data of potential lapse triggers and lapse incidence. We aimed to identify a best-performing and feasible algorithm to take forwards in a JITAI. For 10 days, adult smokers attempting to quit were asked to complete 16 hourly EMAs/day assessing cravings, mood, activity, social context, physical context, and lapse incidence, and to wear a Fitbit Charge 4 during waking hours to passively collect data on steps and heart rate. A series of group-level supervised machine learning algorithms (e.g., Random Forest, XGBoost) were trained and tested, without and with the sensor data. Their ability to predict lapses for out-of-sample (i) observations and (ii) individuals were evaluated. Next, a series of individual-level and hybrid (i.e., group- and individual-level) algorithms were trained and tested. Participants (N = 38) responded to 6,124 EMAs (with 6.9% of responses reporting a lapse). Without sensor data, the best-performing group-level algorithm had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.899 (95% CI = 0.871-0.928). Its ability to classify lapses for out-of-sample individuals ranged from poor to excellent (AUCper person = 0.524-0.994; median AUC = 0.639). 15/38 participants had adequate data for individual-level algorithms to be constructed, with a median AUC of 0.855 (range: 0.451-1.000). Hybrid algorithms could be constructed for 25/38 participants, with a median AUC of 0.692 (range: 0.523 to 0.998). With sensor data, the best-performing group-level algorithm had an AUC of 0.952 (95% CI = 0.933-0.970). Its ability to classify lapses for out-of-sample individuals ranged from poor to excellent (AUCper person = 0.494-0.979; median AUC = 0.745). 11/30 participants had adequate data for individual-level algorithms to be constructed, with a median AUC of 0.983 (range: 0.549-1.000). Hybrid algorithms could be constructed for 20/30 participants, with a median AUC of 0.772 (range: 0.444 to 0.968). In conclusion, high-performing group-level lapse prediction algorithms without and with sensor data had variable performance when applied to out-of-sample individuals. Individual-level and hybrid algorithms could be constructed for a limited number of individuals but had improved performance, particularly when incorporating sensor data for participants with sufficient wear time. Feasibility constraints and the need to balance multiple success criteria in the JITAI development and implementation process are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":74465,"journal":{"name":"PLOS digital health","volume":"3 8","pages":"e0000594"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11343380/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supervised machine learning to predict smoking lapses from Ecological Momentary Assessments and sensor data: Implications for just-in-time adaptive intervention development.\",\"authors\":\"Olga Perski, Dimitra Kale, Corinna Leppin, Tosan Okpako, David Simons, Stephanie P Goldstein, Eric Hekler, Jamie Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000594\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Specific moments of lapse among smokers attempting to quit often lead to full relapse, which highlights a need for interventions that target lapses before they might occur, such as just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAIs). To inform the decision points and tailoring variables of a lapse prevention JITAI, we trained and tested supervised machine learning algorithms that use Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMAs) and wearable sensor data of potential lapse triggers and lapse incidence. We aimed to identify a best-performing and feasible algorithm to take forwards in a JITAI. For 10 days, adult smokers attempting to quit were asked to complete 16 hourly EMAs/day assessing cravings, mood, activity, social context, physical context, and lapse incidence, and to wear a Fitbit Charge 4 during waking hours to passively collect data on steps and heart rate. A series of group-level supervised machine learning algorithms (e.g., Random Forest, XGBoost) were trained and tested, without and with the sensor data. Their ability to predict lapses for out-of-sample (i) observations and (ii) individuals were evaluated. Next, a series of individual-level and hybrid (i.e., group- and individual-level) algorithms were trained and tested. Participants (N = 38) responded to 6,124 EMAs (with 6.9% of responses reporting a lapse). Without sensor data, the best-performing group-level algorithm had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.899 (95% CI = 0.871-0.928). Its ability to classify lapses for out-of-sample individuals ranged from poor to excellent (AUCper person = 0.524-0.994; median AUC = 0.639). 15/38 participants had adequate data for individual-level algorithms to be constructed, with a median AUC of 0.855 (range: 0.451-1.000). Hybrid algorithms could be constructed for 25/38 participants, with a median AUC of 0.692 (range: 0.523 to 0.998). With sensor data, the best-performing group-level algorithm had an AUC of 0.952 (95% CI = 0.933-0.970). Its ability to classify lapses for out-of-sample individuals ranged from poor to excellent (AUCper person = 0.494-0.979; median AUC = 0.745). 11/30 participants had adequate data for individual-level algorithms to be constructed, with a median AUC of 0.983 (range: 0.549-1.000). Hybrid algorithms could be constructed for 20/30 participants, with a median AUC of 0.772 (range: 0.444 to 0.968). In conclusion, high-performing group-level lapse prediction algorithms without and with sensor data had variable performance when applied to out-of-sample individuals. Individual-level and hybrid algorithms could be constructed for a limited number of individuals but had improved performance, particularly when incorporating sensor data for participants with sufficient wear time. Feasibility constraints and the need to balance multiple success criteria in the JITAI development and implementation process are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLOS digital health\",\"volume\":\"3 8\",\"pages\":\"e0000594\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11343380/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLOS digital health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000594\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000594","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

试图戒烟的吸烟者在特定的戒烟失误时刻往往会导致完全复吸,这凸显了在失误可能发生之前针对失误进行干预的必要性,例如及时适应性干预(JITAIs)。为了为预防失效的 JITAI 的决策点和定制变量提供信息,我们训练并测试了有监督的机器学习算法,该算法使用了潜在失效触发因素和失效发生率的生态瞬间评估(EMA)和可穿戴传感器数据。我们的目标是确定一种性能最佳且可行的算法,以便在 JITAI 中推广。在为期 10 天的时间里,我们要求试图戒烟的成年吸烟者每天每小时完成 16 次 EMA,评估渴望、情绪、活动、社会环境、身体环境和失效发生率,并在清醒时佩戴 Fitbit Charge 4,被动收集步数和心率数据。在没有传感器数据和有传感器数据的情况下,对一系列组级监督机器学习算法(如随机森林、XGBoost)进行了训练和测试。评估了这些算法预测样本外 (i) 观察结果和 (ii) 个人失误的能力。接下来,对一系列个体级和混合(即群体级和个体级)算法进行了训练和测试。参与者(N = 38)回答了 6124 次 EMA(6.9% 的回答报告了失误)。在没有传感器数据的情况下,表现最好的群体级算法的接收器工作特征曲线下面积 (AUC) 为 0.899(95% CI = 0.871-0.928)。该算法对样本外个体的失误分类能力从较差到优秀不等(每人的 AUC = 0.524-0.994;中位数 AUC = 0.639)。有 15/38 名参与者拥有足够的数据来构建个人层面的算法,AUC 中位数为 0.855(范围:0.451-1.000)。25/38 名参与者可以构建混合算法,AUC 中位数为 0.692(范围:0.523 至 0.998)。通过传感器数据,表现最好的组级算法的 AUC 为 0.952(95% CI = 0.933-0.970)。该算法对样本外个人的失误分类能力从较差到优秀不等(每人的 AUC = 0.494-0.979;中位数 AUC = 0.745)。11/30的参与者有足够的数据来构建个人层面的算法,中位AUC为0.983(范围:0.549-1.000)。有 20/30 名参与者可以构建混合算法,AUC 中位数为 0.772(范围:0.444 至 0.968)。总之,无传感器数据和有传感器数据的高性能群体级失效预测算法在应用于样本外个体时性能各异。个人级算法和混合算法可用于数量有限的个体,但性能有所提高,特别是在为有足够佩戴时间的参与者纳入传感器数据时。本文讨论了可行性限制以及在 JITAI 开发和实施过程中平衡多种成功标准的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Supervised machine learning to predict smoking lapses from Ecological Momentary Assessments and sensor data: Implications for just-in-time adaptive intervention development.

Specific moments of lapse among smokers attempting to quit often lead to full relapse, which highlights a need for interventions that target lapses before they might occur, such as just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAIs). To inform the decision points and tailoring variables of a lapse prevention JITAI, we trained and tested supervised machine learning algorithms that use Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMAs) and wearable sensor data of potential lapse triggers and lapse incidence. We aimed to identify a best-performing and feasible algorithm to take forwards in a JITAI. For 10 days, adult smokers attempting to quit were asked to complete 16 hourly EMAs/day assessing cravings, mood, activity, social context, physical context, and lapse incidence, and to wear a Fitbit Charge 4 during waking hours to passively collect data on steps and heart rate. A series of group-level supervised machine learning algorithms (e.g., Random Forest, XGBoost) were trained and tested, without and with the sensor data. Their ability to predict lapses for out-of-sample (i) observations and (ii) individuals were evaluated. Next, a series of individual-level and hybrid (i.e., group- and individual-level) algorithms were trained and tested. Participants (N = 38) responded to 6,124 EMAs (with 6.9% of responses reporting a lapse). Without sensor data, the best-performing group-level algorithm had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.899 (95% CI = 0.871-0.928). Its ability to classify lapses for out-of-sample individuals ranged from poor to excellent (AUCper person = 0.524-0.994; median AUC = 0.639). 15/38 participants had adequate data for individual-level algorithms to be constructed, with a median AUC of 0.855 (range: 0.451-1.000). Hybrid algorithms could be constructed for 25/38 participants, with a median AUC of 0.692 (range: 0.523 to 0.998). With sensor data, the best-performing group-level algorithm had an AUC of 0.952 (95% CI = 0.933-0.970). Its ability to classify lapses for out-of-sample individuals ranged from poor to excellent (AUCper person = 0.494-0.979; median AUC = 0.745). 11/30 participants had adequate data for individual-level algorithms to be constructed, with a median AUC of 0.983 (range: 0.549-1.000). Hybrid algorithms could be constructed for 20/30 participants, with a median AUC of 0.772 (range: 0.444 to 0.968). In conclusion, high-performing group-level lapse prediction algorithms without and with sensor data had variable performance when applied to out-of-sample individuals. Individual-level and hybrid algorithms could be constructed for a limited number of individuals but had improved performance, particularly when incorporating sensor data for participants with sufficient wear time. Feasibility constraints and the need to balance multiple success criteria in the JITAI development and implementation process are discussed.

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