Public health nurse perspectives on predicting nonattendance for cervical cancer screening through classification, ensemble, and deep learning models.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Public Health Nursing Pub Date : 2024-05-17 DOI:10.1111/phn.13334
Seeta Devi, Rupali Gangarde, Shubhangi Deokar, Sayyed Faheemuddin Muqeemuddin, Sanidhya Rajendra Awasthi, Sameer Shekhar, Raghav Sonchhatra, Sonopant Joshi
{"title":"Public health nurse perspectives on predicting nonattendance for cervical cancer screening through classification, ensemble, and deep learning models.","authors":"Seeta Devi, Rupali Gangarde, Shubhangi Deokar, Sayyed Faheemuddin Muqeemuddin, Sanidhya Rajendra Awasthi, Sameer Shekhar, Raghav Sonchhatra, Sonopant Joshi","doi":"10.1111/phn.13334","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVES\nWomen's attendance to cervical cancer screening (CCS) is a major concern for healthcare providers in community. This study aims to use the various algorithms that can accurately predict the most barriers of women for nonattendance to CS.\n\n\nDESIGN\nThe real-time data were collected from women presented at OPD of primary health centers (PHCs). About 1046 women's data regarding attendance and nonattendance to CCS were included. In this study, we have used three models, classification, ensemble, and deep learning models, to compare the specific accuracy and AU-ROC for predicting non-attenders for CC.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe current model employs 22 predictors, with soft voting in ensemble models showing slightly higher specificity (96%) and sensitivity (93%) than weighted averaging. Bagging excels with the highest accuracy (98.49%), specificity (97.3%), and ideal sensitivity (100%) with an AUC of 0.99. Classification models reveal Naive Bayes with higher specificity (97%) but lower sensitivity (91%) than Logistic Regression. Random Forest and Neural Network achieve the highest accuracy (98.49%), with an AUC of 0.98. In deep learning, LSTM has an accuracy of 95.68%, higher specificity (97.60%), and lower sensitivity (93.42%) compared to other models. MLP and NN showed the highest AUC values of 0.99.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nEmploying ensemble and deep learning models proved most effective in predicting barriers to nonattendance in cervical screening.","PeriodicalId":54533,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/phn.13334","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Women's attendance to cervical cancer screening (CCS) is a major concern for healthcare providers in community. This study aims to use the various algorithms that can accurately predict the most barriers of women for nonattendance to CS. DESIGN The real-time data were collected from women presented at OPD of primary health centers (PHCs). About 1046 women's data regarding attendance and nonattendance to CCS were included. In this study, we have used three models, classification, ensemble, and deep learning models, to compare the specific accuracy and AU-ROC for predicting non-attenders for CC. RESULTS The current model employs 22 predictors, with soft voting in ensemble models showing slightly higher specificity (96%) and sensitivity (93%) than weighted averaging. Bagging excels with the highest accuracy (98.49%), specificity (97.3%), and ideal sensitivity (100%) with an AUC of 0.99. Classification models reveal Naive Bayes with higher specificity (97%) but lower sensitivity (91%) than Logistic Regression. Random Forest and Neural Network achieve the highest accuracy (98.49%), with an AUC of 0.98. In deep learning, LSTM has an accuracy of 95.68%, higher specificity (97.60%), and lower sensitivity (93.42%) compared to other models. MLP and NN showed the highest AUC values of 0.99. CONCLUSION Employing ensemble and deep learning models proved most effective in predicting barriers to nonattendance in cervical screening.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过分类、集合和深度学习模型预测未参加宫颈癌筛查的公共卫生护士的观点。
目的妇女参加宫颈癌筛查(CCS)是社区医疗服务提供者关注的主要问题。本研究旨在使用各种算法,准确预测妇女不参加宫颈癌筛查的最大障碍。设计从初级保健中心(PHC)门诊部就诊的妇女中收集实时数据。其中包括约 1046 名妇女参加和不参加社区保健服务的数据。在这项研究中,我们使用了分类模型、集合模型和深度学习模型等三种模型,比较了预测未参加社区保健服务者的具体准确性和AU-ROC。结果目前的模型采用了22个预测因子,集合模型中的软投票显示出比加权平均略高的特异性(96%)和灵敏度(93%)。套袋法的准确率(98.49%)、特异性(97.3%)和理想灵敏度(100%)最高,AUC 为 0.99。分类模型显示,与逻辑回归相比,Naive Bayes 的特异性更高(97%),但灵敏度较低(91%)。随机森林和神经网络的准确率最高(98.49%),AUC 为 0.98。在深度学习中,与其他模型相比,LSTM 的准确率为 95.68%,特异性更高(97.60%),灵敏度较低(93.42%)。MLP 和 NN 的 AUC 值最高,为 0.99。结论采用集合模型和深度学习模型预测不参加宫颈筛查的障碍被证明是最有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Public Health Nursing
Public Health Nursing 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
117
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Health Nursing publishes empirical research reports, program evaluations, and case reports focused on populations at risk across the lifespan. The journal also prints articles related to developments in practice, education of public health nurses, theory development, methodological innovations, legal, ethical, and public policy issues in public health, and the history of public health nursing throughout the world. While the primary readership of the Journal is North American, the journal is expanding its mission to address global public health concerns of interest to nurses.
期刊最新文献
Exploring barriers and facilitators to feeding children with minimal or no "Junk Food": Insights from Mexican women. Exploring the Relationship Between Cyberbullying and Technology Addiction in Adolescents. eHealth Interventions of Health Literacy for Stroke Survivors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Exploring Nursing Students' Metaphorical Perceptions and Cognitive Structures Related to the Global Climate Crisis's Impact on Nursing. Storage practice and wastage of pharmaceuticals in Chinese urban-dwelling households: Description of urban-dwelling households.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1