Life Course Digital Twins–Intelligent Monitoring for Early and Continuous Intervention and Prevention (LifeTIME): Proposal for a Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity, which is associated with significant negative outcomes for individuals and health care systems, is increasing in the United Kingdom. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the risk factors (including health, behavior, and environment) for multimorbidity over time. An interdisciplinary approach is essential, as data science, artificial intelligence, and engineering concepts (digital twins) can identify key risk factors throughout the life course, potentially enabling personalized simulation of life-course risk for the development of multimorbidity. Predicting the risk of developing clusters of health conditions before they occur would add clinical value by enabling targeted early preventive interventions, advancing personalized care to improve outcomes, and reducing the burden on health care systems. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify key risk factors that predict multimorbidity throughout the life course by developing an intelligent agent using digital twins so that early interventions can be delivered to improve health outcomes. The objectives of this study are to identify key predictors of lifetime risk of multimorbidity, create a series of simulated computational digital twins that predict risk levels for specific clusters of factors, and test the feasibility of the system. METHODS: This study will use machine learning to develop digital twins by identifying key risk factors throughout the life course that predict the risk of later multimorbidity. The first stage of the development will be the training of a base predictive model. Data from the National Child Development Study, the North West London Integrated Care Record, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, and Cerner's Real World Data will be split into subsets for training and validation, which will be done following the k-fold cross-validation procedure and assessed with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). In addition, 2 data sets-the Early-Life Data Cross-linkage in Research study and the Children and Young People's Health Partnership randomized controlled trial-will be used to develop a series of digital twin personas that simulate clusters of factors to predict different risk levels of developing multimorbidity. RESULTS: The expected results are a validated model, a series of digital twin personas, and a proof-of-concept assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Digital twins could provide an individualized early warning system that predicts the risk of future health conditions and recommends the most effective intervention to minimize that risk. These insights could significantly improve an individual's quality of life and healthy life expectancy and reduce population-level health burdens. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/35738.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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 | 0.032 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".