ArticlePloS one2021
A novel cross-validation strategy for artificial neural networks using distributed-lag environmental factors.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
In recent years, machine learning methods have been applied to various prediction scenarios in time-series data. However, some processing procedures such as cross-validation (CV) that rearrange the order of the longitudinal data might ruin the seriality and lead to a potentially biased outcome. Regarding this issue, a recent study investigated how different types of CV methods influence the predictive errors in conventional time-series data. Here, we examine a more complex distributed lag nonlinear model (DLNM), which has been widely used to assess the cumulative impacts of past exposures on the current health outcome. This research extends the DLNM into an artificial neural network (ANN) and investigates how the ANN model reacts to various CV schemes that result in different predictive biases. We also propose a newly designed permutation ratio to evaluate the performance of the CV in the ANN. This ratio mimics the concept of the R-square in conventional statistical regression models. The results show that as the complexity of the ANN increases, the predicted outcome becomes more stable, and the bias shows a decreasing trend. Among the different settings of hyperparameters, the novel strategy, Leave One Block Out Cross-Validation (LOBO-CV), demonstrated much better results, and the lowest mean square error was observed. The hyperparameters of the ANN trained by the LOBO-CV yielded the minimum number of prediction errors. The newly proposed permutation ratio indicates that LOBO-CV can contribute up to 34% of the prediction accuracy.
Indexed as
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.