Integrating unsupervised and supervised learning techniques to predict traumatic brain injury: A population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work aimed to identify pre-existing health conditions of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and develop predictive models for the first TBI event and its external causes by employing a combination of unsupervised and supervised learning algorithms. We acquired up to five years of pre-injury diagnoses for 488,107 patients with TBI and 488,107 matched control patients who entered the emergency department or acute care hospitals between April 1st, 2002, and March 31st, 2020. Diagnoses were obtained from the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) database which contains province-wide claims data by physicians in Ontario, Canada for inpatient and outpatient services. A screening process was conducted on the OHIP diagnostic codes to limit the subsequent analysis to codes that were predictive of TBI, which concluded that 314 codes were significantly associated with TBI. The Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) model was applied to the diagnostic codes and generated an optimal number of 19 topics that concur with published literature but also suggest other unexplored areas. Estimated word-topic probabilities from the LDA model helped us detect pre-morbid conditions among patients with TBI by uncovering the underlying patterns of diagnoses, meanwhile estimated document-topic probabilities were utilized in variable creation as form of a dimension reduction. We created 19 topic scores for each patient in the cohort which were utilized along with socio-demographic factors for Random Forest binary classifier models. Test set performances evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were: TBI event (AUC = 0.85), external cause of injury: falls (AUC = 0.85), struck by/against (AUC = 0.83), cyclist collision (AUC = 0.76), motor vehicle collision (AUC = 0.83). Our analysis successfully demonstrated the feasibility of using machine learning to predict TBI due to various external causes and identified the most important factors that contribute to this prediction.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".