Developing a prediction model of children asthma risk using population‐based family history health records
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identifying children at high risk of developing asthma can facilitate prevention and early management strategies. We developed a prediction model of children's asthma risk using objectively collected population-based children and parental histories of comorbidities. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study using administrative data from Manitoba, Canada, and included children born from 1974 to 2000 with linkages to ≥1 parent. We identified asthma and prior comorbid condition diagnoses from hospital and outpatient records. We used two machine-learning models: least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF) to identify important predictors. The predictors in the base model included children's demographics, allergic conditions, respiratory infections, and parental asthma. Subsequent models included additional multiple comorbidities for children and parents. RESULTS: The cohort included 195,666 children: 51.3% were males and 17.7% had asthma diagnosis. The base LR model achieved a low predictive performance with sensitivity of 0.47, 95% confidence interval (0.45-0.48), and specificity of 0.67 (0.66-0.67) using a predicted probability threshold of 0.20. Sensitivity significantly improved when children's comorbidities were included using LASSO LR: 0.71 (0.69-0.72). Predictive performance further improved by including parental comorbidities (sensitivity = 0.72 [0.70-0.73], specificity = 0.69 [0.69-0.70]). We observed similar results for the RF models. Children's menstrual disorders and mood and anxiety disorders, parental lipid metabolism disorders and asthma were among the most important variables that predicted asthma risk. CONCLUSION: Including children and parental comorbidities to children's asthma prediction models improves their accuracy.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".