Prospective prediction of anxiety onset in the Canadian longitudinal study on aging (CLSA): A machine learning study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anxiety disorders are among the most common mental health disorders in the middle aged and older population. Because older individuals are more likely to have multiple comorbidities or increased frailty, the impact of anxiety disorders on their overall well-being is exacerbated. Early identification of anxiety disorders using machine learning (ML) can potentially mitigate the adverse consequences associated with these disorders. METHODS: We applied ML to the data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) to predict the onset of anxiety disorders approximately three years in the future. We used Shapley value-based methods to determine the top factor for prediction. We also investigated whether anxiety onset can be predicted by baseline depression-related predictors alone. RESULTS: Our model was able to predict anxiety onset accurately (Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve or AUC = 0.814 ± 0.016 (mean ± standard deviation), balanced accuracy = 0.741 ± 0.016, sensitivity = 0.743 ± 0.033, and specificity = 0.738 ± 0.010). The top predictive factors included prior depression or mood disorder diagnosis, high frailty, anxious personality, and low emotional stability. Depression and mood disorders are well known comorbidity of anxiety; however a prior depression or mood disorder diagnosis could not predict anxiety onset without other factors. LIMITATION: While our findings underscore the importance of a prior depression diagnosis in predicting anxiety, they also highlight that it alone is inadequate, signifying the necessity to incorporate additional predictors for improved prediction accuracy. CONCLUSION: Our study showcases promising prospects for using machine learning to develop personalized prediction models for anxiety onset in middle-aged and older adults using easy-to-access survey data.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".