ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
A novel explainable machine learning-based healthy ageing scale.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utilizing BERTopic modeling for concept discovery in the domain of gerotranscendence and solitude.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2026Article
- Real-world evaluation of arrhythmias detection in hemodialysis patients using wearable electrocardiogram monitor: a two-phase multicenter observational study.BMC nephrology · 2025Observational
- Utilizing BERTopic Modeling for Concept Discovery in the Domain of Gerotranscendence and Solitude.Research square · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAgeing is one of the most important challenges in our society. Evaluating how one is ageing is important in many aspects, from giving personalized recommendations to providing insight for long-term care eligibility. Machine learning can be utilized for that purpose, however, user reservations towards "black-box" predictions call for increased transparency and explainability of results. This study aimed to explore the potential of developing a machine learning-based healthy ageing scale that provides explainable results that could be trusted and understood by informal carers.
methodsIn this study, we used data from 696 older adults collected via personal field interviews as part of independent research. Explanatory factor analysis was used to find candidate healthy ageing aspects. For visualization of key aspects, a web annotation application was developed. Key aspects were selected by gerontologists who later used web annotation applications to evaluate healthy ageing for each older adult on a Likert scale. Logistic Regression, Decision Tree Classifier, Random Forest, KNN, SVM and XGBoost were used for multi-classification machine learning. AUC OvO, AUC OvR, F1, Precision and Recall were used for evaluation. Finally, SHAP was applied to best model predictions to make them explainable.
resultsThe experimental results show that human annotations of healthy ageing could be modelled using machine learning where among several algorithms XGBoost showed superior performance. The use of XGBoost resulted in 0.92 macro-averaged AuC OvO and 0.76 macro-averaged F1. SHAP was applied to generate local explanations for predictions and shows how each feature is influencing the prediction.
conclusionThe resulting explainable predictions make a step toward practical scale implementation into decision support systems. The development of such a decision support system that would incorporate an explainable model could reduce user reluctance towards the utilization of AI in healthcare and provide explainable and trusted insights to informal carers or healthcare providers as a basis to shape tangible actions for improving ageing. Furthermore, the cooperation with gerontology specialists throughout the process also indicates expert knowledge as integrated into the model.
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.