Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33471800›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Identifying intentional injuries among children and adolescents based on Machine Learning.

Xiling Yin, Dan Ma, Kejing Zhu, Deyun Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Xiling YinDepartment of Public Health and Health Research, Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Zhuhai City, Zhuhai, Guangdong, China.
Dan MaDepartment of Public Health and Health Research, Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Zhuhai City, Zhuhai, Guangdong, China.
Kejing ZhuDepartment of Public Health and Health Research, Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Zhuhai City, Zhuhai, Guangdong, China.
Deyun LiDepartment of Public Health and Health Research, Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Zhuhai City, Zhuhai, Guangdong, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7328-1390

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCompared to other studies, the injury monitoring of Chinese children and adolescents has captured a low level of intentional injuries on account of self-harm/suicide and violent attacks. Intentional injuries in children and adolescents have not been apparent from the data. It is possible that there has been a misclassification of existing intentional injuries, and there is a lack of research literature on the misclassification of intentional injuries. This study aimed to discuss the feasibility of discriminating the intention of injury based on Machine Learning (ML) modelling and provided ideas for understanding whether there was a misclassification of intentional injuries.

methodsInformation entropy was used to determine the correlation between variables and the intention of injury, and Naive Bayes (NB), Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), Adaboost algorithms and Deep Neural Networks (DNN) were used to create an intention of injury discrimination model. The models were compared by comprehensively testing the discrimination effect to determine stability and consistency.

resultsFor the area under the ROC curve with different intentions of injuries, the NB model was 0.891, 0.880, and 0.897, respectively; the DT model was 0.870, 0.803, and 0.871, respectively; the RF model was 0.850, 0.809, and 0.845, respectively; the Adaboost model was 0.914, 0.846, and 0.914, respectively; the DNN model was 0.927, 0.835, and 0.934, respectively. In a comprehensive comparison of the five models, DNN and Adaboost models had higher values for the determination of the intention of injury. A discrimination of cases with unclear intentions of injury showed that on average, unintentional injuries, violent attacks, and self-harm/suicides accounted for 86.57%, 6.81%, and 6.62%, respectively.

conclusionIt was feasible to use the ML algorithm to determine the injury intention of children and adolescents. The research suggested that the DNN and Adaboost models had higher values for the determination of the intention of injury. This study could build a foundation for transforming the model into a tool for rapid diagnosis and excavating potential intentional injuries of children and adolescents by widely collecting the influencing factors, extracting the influence variables characteristically, reducing the complexity and improving the performance of the models in the future.

Indexed as

Machine LearningSelf-Injurious BehaviorSuicideViolenceWounds and InjuriesAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansIntentionMale

Identifiers

PMID33471800
PMCPMC7817032
OpenAlexW3124176627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.