MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391220921 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1309490

Can adverse childhood experiences predict chronic health conditions? Development of trauma-informed, explainable machine learning models

2024· article· en· W4391220921 on OpenAlexaff
Hanin B. Afzal, Tasfia Jahangir, Yiyang Mei, Annabelle Madden, Abeed Sarker, Sangmi Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Nursing ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsLogistic regressionRandom forestMedicineNaive Bayes classifierSocial determinants of healthMachine learningGerontologyInternal medicinePublic healthSupport vector machineComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Decades of research have established the association between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and adult onset of chronic diseases, influenced by health behaviors and social determinants of health (SDoH). Machine Learning (ML) is a powerful tool for computing these complex associations and accurately predicting chronic health conditions. Methods: Using the 2021 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey, we developed several ML models-random forest, logistic regression, support vector machine, Naïve Bayes, and K-Nearest Neighbor-over data from a sample of 52,268 respondents. We predicted 13 chronic health conditions based on ACE history, health behaviors, SDoH, and demographics. We further assessed each variable's importance in outcome prediction for model interpretability. We evaluated model performance via the Area Under the Curve (AUC) score. Results: With the inclusion of data on ACEs, our models outperformed or demonstrated similar accuracies to existing models in the literature that used SDoH to predict health outcomes. The most accurate models predicted diabetes, pulmonary diseases, and heart attacks. The random forest model was the most effective for diabetes (AUC = 0.784) and heart attacks (AUC = 0.732), and the logistic regression model most accurately predicted pulmonary diseases (AUC = 0.753). The strongest predictors across models were age, ever monitored blood sugar or blood pressure, count of the monitoring behaviors for blood sugar or blood pressure, BMI, time of last cholesterol check, employment status, income, count of vaccines received, health insurance status, and total ACEs. A cumulative measure of ACEs was a stronger predictor than individual ACEs. Discussion: Our models can provide an interpretable, trauma-informed framework to identify and intervene with at-risk individuals early to prevent chronic health conditions and address their inequalities in the U.S.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207