Correlates of cannabis use disorder in the United States: A comparison of logistic regression, classification trees, and random forests

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Journal of psychiatric research Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2022.05.021
Nathaniel A. Dell , Michael G. Vaughn , Sweta Prasad Srivastava , Abdulaziz Alsolami , Christopher P. Salas-Wright
{"title":"Correlates of cannabis use disorder in the United States: A comparison of logistic regression, classification trees, and random forests","authors":"Nathaniel A. Dell ,&nbsp;Michael G. Vaughn ,&nbsp;Sweta Prasad Srivastava ,&nbsp;Abdulaziz Alsolami ,&nbsp;Christopher P. Salas-Wright","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychires.2022.05.021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Although several recent studies have examined psychosocial and demographic correlates of cannabis use disorder (CUD) in adults, few, if any, recent studies have evaluated the performance of machine learning methods relative to standard </span>logistic regression<span> for identifying correlates of CUD. The present study used pooled data from the 2015–2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health to evaluate psychosocial and demographic correlates of CUD in adults. In addition, we compared the performance of logistic regression, classification trees, and random forest methods in classifying CUD. When comparing the performance of each method on the test data set, classification trees (AUC = 0.84, 95%CI: 0.82, 0.85) and random forest (AUC = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.82, 0.85) performed similarly and superior to logistic regression (AUC = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.74, 0.79). Results of the random forests reveal that marital status, risk propensity, age, and cocaine dependence variables contributed most to node purity, whereas model accuracy would decrease significantly if county type, income, race, and education variables were excluded from the model. One possible approach to improving the efficiency, interpretability, and clinical insights of CUD correlates is the employment of machine learning techniques.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":16868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychiatric research","volume":"151 ","pages":"Pages 590-597"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychiatric research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395622002746","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Although several recent studies have examined psychosocial and demographic correlates of cannabis use disorder (CUD) in adults, few, if any, recent studies have evaluated the performance of machine learning methods relative to standard logistic regression for identifying correlates of CUD. The present study used pooled data from the 2015–2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health to evaluate psychosocial and demographic correlates of CUD in adults. In addition, we compared the performance of logistic regression, classification trees, and random forest methods in classifying CUD. When comparing the performance of each method on the test data set, classification trees (AUC = 0.84, 95%CI: 0.82, 0.85) and random forest (AUC = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.82, 0.85) performed similarly and superior to logistic regression (AUC = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.74, 0.79). Results of the random forests reveal that marital status, risk propensity, age, and cocaine dependence variables contributed most to node purity, whereas model accuracy would decrease significantly if county type, income, race, and education variables were excluded from the model. One possible approach to improving the efficiency, interpretability, and clinical insights of CUD correlates is the employment of machine learning techniques.

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
美国大麻使用障碍的相关因素:逻辑回归、分类树和随机森林的比较
尽管最近有几项研究调查了成人大麻使用障碍(CUD)的社会心理和人口统计学相关性,但最近的研究很少(如果有的话)评估了机器学习方法相对于标准逻辑回归识别CUD相关性的性能。本研究使用了2015-2018年全国药物使用和健康调查的汇总数据,以评估成人CUD的社会心理和人口统计学相关性。此外,我们比较了逻辑回归、分类树和随机森林方法在分类CUD方面的性能。当比较每种方法在测试数据集上的性能时,分类树(AUC = 0.84, 95%CI: 0.82, 0.85)和随机森林(AUC = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.82, 0.85)的性能与逻辑回归(AUC = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.74, 0.79)相似且优于逻辑回归(AUC = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.74, 0.79)。随机森林的结果显示,婚姻状况、风险倾向、年龄和可卡因依赖变量对节点纯度贡献最大,而如果排除县类型、收入、种族和教育变量,模型精度将显著降低。提高CUD相关性的效率、可解释性和临床见解的一种可能方法是使用机器学习技术。
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
Journal of psychiatric research
Journal of psychiatric research 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.10%
发文量
622
审稿时长
130 days
期刊介绍: Founded in 1961 to report on the latest work in psychiatry and cognate disciplines, the Journal of Psychiatric Research is dedicated to innovative and timely studies of four important areas of research: (1) clinical studies of all disciplines relating to psychiatric illness, as well as normal human behaviour, including biochemical, physiological, genetic, environmental, social, psychological and epidemiological factors; (2) basic studies pertaining to psychiatry in such fields as neuropsychopharmacology, neuroendocrinology, electrophysiology, genetics, experimental psychology and epidemiology; (3) the growing application of clinical laboratory techniques in psychiatry, including imagery and spectroscopy of the brain, molecular biology and computer sciences;
期刊最新文献
How does the measurement of anesthetic depth using the patient state index influence the course of electroconvulsive therapy in patients with major depressive disorder? Marriage and postpartum major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Residual symptoms following trauma-focused treatment for comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder. Social functioning and frontal alpha asymmetry in schizophrenia. The impact of community-based, non-pharmaceutical interventions on anxiety and depression in fibromyalgia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
×
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