Predicting the hearing outcome in sudden sensorineural hearing loss via machine learning models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL) is a multifactorial disorder with high heterogeneity, thus the outcomes vary widely. This study aimed to develop predictive models based on four machine learning methods for SSHL, identifying the best performer for clinical application. DESIGN: Single-centre retrospective study. SETTING: Chinese People's liberation army (PLA) hospital, Beijing, China. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1220 in-patient SSHL patients were enrolled between June 2008 and December 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: An advanced deep learning technique, deep belief network (DBN), together with the conventional logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM) and multilayer perceptron (MLP) were developed to predict the dichotomised hearing outcome of SSHL by inputting six feature collections derived from 149 potential predictors. Accuracy, precision, recall, F-score and the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (ROC-AUC) were exploited to compare the prediction performance of different models. RESULTS: Overall the best predictive ability was provided by the DBN model when tested in the raw data set with 149 variables, achieving an accuracy of 77.58% and AUC of 0.84. Nevertheless, DBN yielded inferior performance after feature pruning. In contrast, the LR, SVM and MLP models demonstrated opposite trend as the greatest individual prediction powers were obtained when included merely three variables, with the ROC-AUC ranging from 0.79 to 0.81, and then decreased with the increasing size of input features combinations. CONCLUSIONS: With the input of enough features, DBN can be a robust prediction tool for SSHL. But LR is more practical for early prediction in routine clinical application using three readily available variables, that is time elapse between symptom onset and study entry, initial hearing level and audiogram.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".