Analysis of Health Insurance Big Data for Early Detection of Disabilities: Algorithm Development and Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early detection of childhood developmental delays is very important for the treatment of disabilities. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the possibility of detecting childhood developmental delays leading to disabilities before clinical registration by analyzing big data from a health insurance database. METHODS: In this study, the data from children, individuals aged up to 13 years (n=2412), from the Sample Cohort 2.0 DB of the Korea National Health Insurance Service were organized by age range. Using 6 categories (having no disability, having a physical disability, having a brain lesion, having a visual impairment, having a hearing impairment, and having other conditions), features were selected in the order of importance with a tree-based model. We used multiple classification algorithms to find the best model for each age range. The earliest age range with clinically significant performance showed the age at which conditions can be detected early. RESULTS: The disability detection model showed that it was possible to detect disabilities with significant accuracy even at the age of 4 years, about a year earlier than the mean diagnostic age of 4.99 years. CONCLUSIONS: Using big data analysis, we discovered the possibility of detecting disabilities earlier than clinical diagnoses, which would allow us to take appropriate action to prevent disabilities.
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 | 0.012 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".