Exploring the Feasibility of Applying Deep Learning for the Early Prediction of Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Arthritis is one of the most common chronic diseases. Early detection of arthritis and its progression can facilitate early intervention measures, lowering disease severity in patients. As electronic health records (EHR) become more accessible, this study assesses whether general health information and arthritis-related questionnaires can be used in arthritis diagnosis, without the involvement of costly imaging methods. Therefore, we created deep learning (DL) and machine learning (ML) models to explore the feasibility of combining EHR and modern computational tools to diagnose arthritis. Methods: A total of 782 arthritis patients and 4014 control patients were identified from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) – a ten-year-long observational study that included patient EHR in five time points. Six hundred variables were filtered by random forest classifier followed by manual filtering. Data were split properly to training, testing and validation set, and the training set was balanced. Sequential, nonsequential DL models, and five independent DL models for each time points were used. The accuracy, positive prevalence value (PPV), negative prevalence value (NPV), and area under curve (AUC), were assessed and compared with four classical ML models. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) summary analysis was also conducted. Results: Sequential and non-sequential deep learning models showed accuracies of ~ 0.97, and the four classical machine learning approaches showed accuracies of above 0.9. High positive and negative predicted values (> 0.90) for all of the models suggested the potential clinical applicability of the model, while the SHAP analysis demonstrated its interpretability. Discussion: We tested various models and showed the ability to use machine learning methods for early diagnosis of arthritis with EHR. The models can be used as a screening tool to select susceptible patients for confirmatory tests such as X-ray and MRI. Identification of early disease states could facilitate protective measures that slow disease progression.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".