ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Machine learning models for chronic disease risks using complex survey data: the impact of sample weights.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic noncommunicable diseases are the leading cause of deaths globally but can be preventable by early detection, screening, and treatment. Recent studies have used machine learning methods ignoring sample weights determined by a complex design framework, which leads to significant bias and ends up with the spurious conclusion in statistical inference. We have examined whether adjusting sample weights improves prediction and variable selection using two examples, hypertension and diabetes, from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. We used the traditional K-fold cross validation and its weighted counterparts, replicate weights methods, to finalize models fitted by four popular machine learning methods and two under-sampling approaches for handling class imbalance ad hoc. Due to lack of options managing complex sampling structures in existing machine learning software packages, We have also developed a r-MLSurvey that integrates the replicate weights methods into the machine learning methods as an extension of weighted L1-penalized logistic regression. The model performance was assessed by accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), and their counterparts for the weighted model evaluation. Results show that variable selection results differ by the under-sampling methods and sample weights' adjustment; the weighted AUC, compared with the AUC, suggests final unweighted models either overestimate or underestimate the true population parameters. The sampling design also appears to provide moderate influence on accuracy for these relatively well-studied diseases, but the effect on selected variables' significance varies by algorithm and class imbalance. Random forest would be preferred without users' capability of adjusting sample weights. Careful selection of the final models is recommended for moderately class-imbalanced complex survey data to avoid biasedness. Our application to the machine learning algorithms offers the usefulness of complex survey data to achieve unbiased prediction in broader research disciplines in need of sufficiently large data.
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.