Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38875533›Full record

ArticleJMIR AI2024

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.

Cheng Pan, Hao Luo, Gary Cheung, Huiquan Zhou, Reynold Cheng, Sarah Cullum, Chuan Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR AI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors.

Cheng PanDepartment of Computer Science, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8884-4405
Hao LuoDepartment of Social Work and Social Administration, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4261-3414
Gary CheungDepartment of Psychological Medicine, School of Medicine, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0239-9356
Huiquan ZhouDepartment of Social Work and Social Administration, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1499-9735
Reynold ChengDepartment of Computer Science, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9480-9809
Sarah CullumDepartment of Psychological Medicine, School of Medicine, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0785-9101
Chuan WuDepartment of Computer Science, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3144-4398

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine 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.

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

methodsWe 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.

resultsA 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.

conclusionsThe 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.

Indexed as

assessmentdata setfeaturesfrailtyhome carelogistic regressionmachine learningmodelmortality predictionolder adultssample size

Identifiers

PMID38875533
PMCPMC11041467

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.