Predicting and comparing the long-term impact of lifestyle interventions on individuals with eating disorders in active population: a machine learning evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to evaluate and predict the long-term effectiveness of five lifestyle interventions for individuals with eating disorders using machine learning techniques. Methods: This study, conducted at Dr. Irandoust's Health Center at Qazvin from August 2021 to August 2023, aimed to evaluate the effects of five lifestyle interventions on individuals with eating disorders, initially diagnosed using The Eating Disorder Diagnostic Scale (EDDS). The interventions were: (1) Counseling, exercise, and dietary regime, (2) Aerobic exercises with dietary regime, (3) Walking and dietary regime, (4) Exercise with a flexible diet, and (5) Exercises through online programs and applications. Out of 955 enrolled participants, 706 completed the study, which measured Body Fat Percentage (BFP), Waist-Hip Ratio (WHR), Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS), Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol, Total Cholesterol (CHO), Weight, and Triglycerides (TG) at baseline, during, and at the end of the intervention. Random Forest and Gradient Boosting Regressors, following feature engineering, were used to analyze the data, focusing on the interventions' long-term effectiveness on health outcomes related to eating disorders. Results: Feature engineering with Random Forest and Gradient Boosting Regressors, respectively, reached an accuracy of 85 and 89%, then 89 and 90% after dataset balancing. The interventions were ranked based on predicted effectiveness: counseling with exercise and dietary regime, aerobic exercises with dietary regime, walking with dietary regime, exercise with a flexible diet, and exercises through online programs. Conclusion: The results show that Machine Learning (ML) models effectively predicted the long-term effectiveness of lifestyle interventions. The current study suggests a significant potential for tailored health strategies. This emphasizes the most effective interventions for individuals with eating disorders. According to the results, it can also be suggested to expand demographics and geographic locations of participants, longer study duration, exploring advanced machine learning techniques, and including psychological and social adherence factors. Ultimately, these results can guide healthcare providers and policymakers in creating targeted lifestyle intervention strategies, emphasizing personalized health plans, and leveraging machine learning for predictive healthcare solutions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".