MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606854604 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v1i1.118

Multiple Correspondence Analysis is a Useful Tool to Visualize Complex Categorical Correlated Data

2017· article· en· W2606854604 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Health Quality Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorical variableConfoundingCovariateMedicineCorrespondence analysisPopulationSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Multiple correspondence analysisPsychiatryStatisticsEnvironmental healthMathematicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT
 ObjectivesWe sought to identify the most expensive hospitalized individuals in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan in fiscal year 2012/13, and determine the primary cause of their high use of health services. Our aim was to identify health problems that can be prevented or better managed in a non-hospital health care setting. Comorbid conditions are an important and confounding covariate in this population and so we used multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) to investigate the association of these conditions with each other and the most responsible diagnosis for each hospitalization. MCA is a multivariable descriptive statistical technique that displays the relationship between categorical variables in 2-dimensional graphical form.
 ApproachWe identified the most expensive 5% of people hospitalized between 01APR2012 and 31MAR2013. Hospital costs accounted for the majority of costs, but physician, drug, long-term care, and home care costs were added. Comorbid conditions in any of the 25 hospital diagnostic fields were identified and grouped into categories based upon ICD-10-CA subcategories. For example, category 1 was ICD-10-CA codes F10-F19: Mental and behavioural disorders due to psychoactive drug use, while category 2 was ICD-10-CA codes F20-F29: Schizophrenia, schizotypal, and delusional disorders. SAS™ v9.3 was used to conduct MCA and generate graphs displaying the correlation between each comorbid condition category, where the distance of each dot from the other represents the strength of the association between the disease categories (i.e., diseases that are correlated cluster together.) The frequency of each category of comorbid condition was represented by the size of the dots on the graph (e.g., the more people with the disease, the larger the dot.) Categories of comorbid conditions were redefined based upon data findings and clinical expertise.
 ResultsThree patient groups emerged as being amenable to intervention and thus cost savings, specifically (1) individuals of advanced age who are no longer able to live at home and are hospitalized while waiting for a bed in a long-term care facility, (2) individuals with a mental health and/or addiction problem, and (3) individuals who experienced medical harm during their time in hospital.
 ConclusionMCA is a valuable graphical tool that is easy to learn and, in conjunction with other statistical techniques, can be used to elucidate the relationship between complex correlated categorical variables.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0080.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.338
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.151 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it