Identifying biologically implausible values in big longitudinal data: an example applied to child growth data from the Brazilian food and nutrition surveillance system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several strategies for identifying biologically implausible values in longitudinal anthropometric data have recently been proposed, but the suitability of these strategies for large population datasets needs to be better understood. This study evaluated the impact of removing population outliers and the additional value of identifying and removing longitudinal outliers on the trajectories of length/height and weight and on the prevalence of child growth indicators in a large longitudinal dataset of child growth data. METHODS: Length/height and weight measurements of children aged 0 to 59 months from the Brazilian Food and Nutrition Surveillance System were analyzed. Population outliers were identified using z-scores from the World Health Organization (WHO) growth charts. After identifying and removing population outliers, residuals from linear mixed-effects models were used to flag longitudinal outliers. The following cutoffs for residuals were tested to flag those: -3/+3, -4/+4, -5/+5, -6/+6. The selected child growth indicators included length/height-for-age z-scores and weight-for-age z-scores, classified according to the WHO charts. RESULTS: The dataset included 50,154,738 records from 10,775,496 children. Boys and girls had 5.74% and 5.31% of length/height and 5.19% and 4.74% of weight values flagged as population outliers, respectively. After removing those, the percentage of longitudinal outliers varied from 0.02% (<-6/>+6) to 1.47% (<-3/>+3) for length/height and from 0.07 to 1.44% for weight in boys. In girls, the percentage of longitudinal outliers varied from 0.01 to 1.50% for length/height and from 0.08 to 1.45% for weight. The initial removal of population outliers played the most substantial role in the growth trajectories as it was the first step in the cleaning process, while the additional removal of longitudinal outliers had lower influence on those, regardless of the cutoff adopted. The prevalence of the selected indicators were also affected by both population and longitudinal (to a lesser extent) outliers. CONCLUSIONS: Although both population and longitudinal outliers can detect biologically implausible values in child growth data, removing population outliers seemed more relevant in this large administrative dataset, especially in calculating summary statistics. However, both types of outliers need to be identified and removed for the proper evaluation of trajectories.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.034 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".