MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611825236 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0176991

Prediction of the severity of obstructive sleep apnea by anthropometric features via support vector machine

2017· article· en· W2611825236 on OpenAlexaff
Wen‐Te Liu, Hau‐Tieng Wu, Jer-Nan Juang, Adam Paul Wisniewski, Hsin‐Chien Lee, Dean Wu, Yu-Lun Lo

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropometryObstructive sleep apneaWaistBody mass indexMedicineMachine learningApneaSleep apneaSupport vector machineArtificial intelligenceCircumferenceSubgroup analysisPhysical therapyInternal medicineComputer scienceMathematicsMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To develop an applicable prediction for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is still a challenge in clinical practice. We apply a modern machine learning method, the support vector machine to establish a predicting model for the severity of OSA. The support vector machine was applied to build up a prediction model based on three anthropometric features (neck circumference, waist circumference, and body mass index) and age on the first database. The established model was then valided independently on the second database. The anthropometric features and age were combined to generate powerful predictors for OSA. Following the common practice, we predict if a subject has the apnea-hypopnea index greater then 15 or not as well as 30 or not. Dividing by genders and age, for the AHI threhosld 15 (respectively 30), the cross validation and testing accuracy for the prediction were 85.3% and 76.7% (respectively 83.7% and 75.5%) in young female, while the negative likelihood ratio for the AHI threhosld 15 (respectively 30) for the cross validation and testing were 0.2 and 0.32 (respectively 0.06 and 0.1) in young female. The more accurate results with lower negative likelihood ratio in the younger patients, especially the female subgroup, reflect the potential of the proposed model for the screening purpose and the importance of approaching by different genders and the effects of aging.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207