ArticleScientific reports2024
Utilizing machine learning to predict participant response to follow-up health surveys in the Millennium Cohort Study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Millennium Cohort Study is a longitudinal study which collects self-reported data from surveys to examine the long-term effects of military service. Participant nonresponse to follow-up surveys presents a potential threat to the validity and generalizability of study findings. In recent years, predictive analytics has emerged as a promising tool to identify predictors of nonresponse. Here, we develop a high-skill classifier using machine learning techniques to predict participant response to follow-up surveys of the Millennium Cohort Study. Six supervised algorithms were employed to predict response to the 2021 follow-up survey. Using latent class analysis (LCA), we classified participants based on historical survey response and compared prediction performance with and without this variable. Feature analysis was subsequently conducted on the best-performing model. Including the LCA variable in the machine learning analysis, all six algorithms performed comparably. Without the LCA variable, random forest outperformed the benchmark regression model, however overall prediction performance decreased. Feature analysis showed the LCA variable as the most important predictor. Our findings highlight the importance of historical response to improve prediction performance of participant response to follow-up surveys. Machine learning algorithms can be especially valuable when historical data are not available. Implementing these methods in longitudinal studies can enhance outreach efforts by strategically targeting participants, ultimately boosting survey response rates and mitigating nonresponse.
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.