ArticleScientific reports2019
Using Machine Learning to Uncover Hidden Heterogeneities in Survey Data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- When survey science met web tracking: Presenting an error framework for metered data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Survey responses in public health surveys are heterogeneous. The quality of a respondent's answers depends on many factors, including cognitive abilities, interview context, and whether the interview is in person or self-administered. A largely unexplored issue is how the language used for public health survey interviews is associated with the survey response. We introduce a machine learning approach, Fuzzy Forests, which we use for model selection. We use the 2013 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) as our training sample and the 2014 CHIS as the test sample. We found that non-English language survey responses differ substantially from English responses in reported health outcomes. We also found heterogeneity among the Asian languages suggesting that caution should be used when interpreting results that compare across these languages. The 2013 Fuzzy Forests model also correctly predicted 86% of good health outcomes using 2014 data as the test set. We show that the Fuzzy Forests methodology is potentially useful for screening for and understanding other types of survey response heterogeneity. This is especially true in high-dimensional and complex surveys.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.