MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281758643 · doi:10.1038/s41390-022-02137-1

Big data, machine learning, and population health: predicting cognitive outcomes in childhood

2022· review· en· W4281758643 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Research · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Research BoardHealth Service ExecutiveWellcome TrustIrish Research eLibraryCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
KeywordsCognitionIntervention (counseling)PopulationEarly childhoodMedicineCognitive developmentPopulation healthPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of machine learning (ML) to address population health challenges has received much less attention than its application in the clinical setting. One such challenge is addressing disparities in early childhood cognitive development-a complex public health issue rooted in the social determinants of health, exacerbated by inequity, characterised by intergenerational transmission, and which will continue unabated without novel approaches to address it. Early life, the period of optimal neuroplasticity, presents a window of opportunity for early intervention to improve cognitive development. Unfortunately for many, this window will be missed, and intervention may never occur or occur only when overt signs of cognitive delay manifest. In this review, we explore the potential value of ML and big data analysis in the early identification of children at risk for poor cognitive outcome, an area where there is an apparent dearth of research. We compare and contrast traditional statistical methods with ML approaches, provide examples of how ML has been used to date in the field of neurodevelopmental disorders, and present a discussion of the opportunities and risks associated with its use at a population level. The review concludes by highlighting potential directions for future research in this area. IMPACT: To date, the application of machine learning to address population health challenges in paediatrics lags behind other clinical applications. This review provides an overview of the public health challenge we face in addressing disparities in childhood cognitive development and focuses on the cornerstone of early intervention. Recent advances in our ability to collect large volumes of data, and in analytic capabilities, provide a potential opportunity to improve current practices in this field. This review explores the potential role of machine learning and big data analysis in the early identification of children at risk for poor cognitive outcomes.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.236 · 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