MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4283316665 · doi:10.2196/37141

Using Shopping Data to Improve the Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer: Computational Analysis of a Web-Based Survey

2022· article· en· W4283316665 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elizabeth Dolan, James Goulding, Laila J. Tata, Alexandra Lang

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Cancer · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueOvarian function and disorders
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUniversity of NottinghamUK Research and Innovation
Mots-clésLogistic regressionMedicineOvarian cancerHealth careFamily medicinePopulationOddsOdds ratioCancerEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background Shopping data can be analyzed using machine learning techniques to study population health. It is unknown if the use of such methods can successfully investigate prediagnosis purchases linked to self-medication of symptoms of ovarian cancer. Objective The aims of this study were to gain new domain knowledge from women’s experiences, understand how women’s shopping behavior relates to their pathway to the diagnosis of ovarian cancer, and inform research on computational analysis of shopping data for population health. Methods A web-based survey on individuals’ shopping patterns prior to an ovarian cancer diagnosis was analyzed to identify key knowledge about health care purchases. Logistic regression and random forest models were employed to statistically examine how products linked to potential symptoms related to presentation to health care and timing of diagnosis. Results Of the 101 women surveyed with ovarian cancer, 58.4% (59/101) bought nonprescription health care products for up to more than a year prior to diagnosis, including pain relief and abdominal products. General practitioner advice was the primary reason for the purchases (23/59, 39%), with 51% (30/59) occurring due to a participant’s doctor believing their health problems were due to a condition other than ovarian cancer. Associations were shown between purchases made because a participant’s doctor believing their health problems were due to a condition other than ovarian cancer and the following variables: health problems for longer than a year prior to diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] 7.33, 95% CI 1.58-33.97), buying health care products for more than 6 months to a year (OR 3.82, 95% CI 1.04-13.98) or for more than a year (OR 7.64, 95% CI 1.38-42.33), and the number of health care product types purchased (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.13-2.11). Purchasing patterns are shown to be potentially predictive of a participant’s doctor thinking their health problems were due to some condition other than ovarian cancer, with nested cross-validation of random forest classification models achieving an overall in-sample accuracy score of 89.1% and an out-of-sample score of 70.1%. Conclusions Women in the survey were 7 times more likely to have had a duration of more than a year of health problems prior to a diagnosis of ovarian cancer if they were self-medicating based on advice from a doctor rather than having made the decision to self-medicate independently. Predictive modelling indicates that women in such situations, who are self-medicating because their doctor believes their health problems may be due to a condition other than ovarian cancer, exhibit distinct shopping behaviors that may be identifiable within purchasing data. Through exploratory research combining women sharing their behaviors prior to diagnosis and computational analysis of these data, this study demonstrates that women’s shopping data could potentially be useful for early ovarian cancer detection.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,020
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,997

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,123
Tête enseignante GPT0,389
Écart entre enseignants0,266 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR CancerMême sujetOvarian function and disordersTravaux en français237 207