MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388870160 · doi:10.2196/46791

A Machine Learning–Based Preclinical Osteoporosis Screening Tool (POST): Model Development and Validation Study

2023· article· en· W4388870160 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qingling Yang, Huilin Cheng, Jing Qin, Alice Yuen Loke, Fei‐Wan Ngai, Ka Chun Chong, Dexing Zhang, Yang Gao, Haoxiang Wang, Zhao‐min Liu, Chun Hao, Yao Jie Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHong Kong Polytechnic University
KeywordsOsteoporosisMachine learningLogistic regressionMedicineReceiver operating characteristicArtificial intelligenceNaive Bayes classifierGradient boostingPredictive modellingSupport vector machinePhysical therapyComputer scienceRandom forestInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Identifying persons with a high risk of developing osteoporosis and preventing the occurrence of the first fracture is a health care priority. Most existing osteoporosis screening tools have high sensitivity but relatively low specificity. Objective: We aimed to develop an easily accessible and high-performance preclinical risk screening tool for osteoporosis using a machine learning-based method among the Hong Kong Chinese population. Methods: Participants aged 45 years or older were enrolled from 6 clinics in the 3 major districts of Hong Kong. The potential risk factors for osteoporosis were collected through a validated, self-administered questionnaire and then filtered using a machine learning-based method. Bone mineral density was measured with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at the clinics; osteoporosis was defined as a t score of -2.5 or lower. We constructed machine learning models, including gradient boosting machines, support vector machines, and naive Bayes, as well as the commonly used logistic regression models, for the prediction of osteoporosis. The best-performing model was chosen as the final tool, named the Preclinical Osteoporosis Screening Tool (POST). Model performance was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and other metrics. Results: Among the 800 participants enrolled in this study, the prevalence of osteoporosis was 10.6% (n=85). The machine learning-based Boruta algorithm identified 15 significantly important predictors from the 113 potential risk factors. Seven variables were further selected based on their accessibility and convenience for daily self-assessment and health care practice, including age, gender, education level, decreased body height, BMI, number of teeth lost, and the intake of vitamin D supplements, to construct the POST. The AUC of the POST was 0.86 and the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were all 0.83. The positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and F1-score were 0.41, 0.98, and 0.56, respectively. Conclusions: The machine learning-based POST was conveniently accessible and exhibited accurate discriminative capabilities for the prediction of osteoporosis; it might be useful to guide population-based preclinical screening of osteoporosis and clinical decision-making.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207