使用围绕中位分割的聚类分析(PAM)来检查基于治疗分类系统的亚组中腰痛患者的异质性。

Esmaeil Shokri, Mohsen Razeghi, Hadi Raeisi Shahraki, Reza Jalli, Alireza Motealleh
{"title":"使用围绕中位分割的聚类分析(PAM)来检查基于治疗分类系统的亚组中腰痛患者的异质性。","authors":"Esmaeil Shokri,&nbsp;Mohsen Razeghi,&nbsp;Hadi Raeisi Shahraki,&nbsp;Reza Jalli,&nbsp;Alireza Motealleh","doi":"10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2001-1047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current evidence in low back pain (LBP) focuses on population averages and traditional multivariate analyses to find the significant difference between variables. Such a focus actively obscured the heterogeneity and increased errors. Cluster analysis (CA) addresses the mentioned shortcomings by calculating the degree of similarity among the relevant variables of the different objects.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the agreement between the treatment-based classification (TBC) system and the equivalent 3 cluster typology created by partitioning around medoids (PAM) analysis.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, a convenient sample of 90 patients with low back pain (50 males and 40 females) aged 20 to 65 years was included in the study. The patients were selected based on the 21 criteria of 2007 TBC system. An equivalent 3 cluster typology (C3) was applied using PAM method. Cohen's Kappa was run to determine if there was agreement between the TBC system and the equivalent C3 typology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PAM analysis revealed the evidence of clustering for a C3 cluster typology with average Silhouette widths of 0.12. Cohen's Kappa revealed fair agreement between the TBC system and C3 cluster typology (Percent of agreement 61%, Kappa=0.36, <i>P</i><0.001). Selected criteria by PAM analysis were different with original TBC system.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Higher probability of chance agreement was observed between two classification methods. Significant inhomogeneity was observed in subgroups of the 2007 TBC system.</p>","PeriodicalId":38035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/db/a2/JBPE-13-89.PMC9923237.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Use of Cluster Analysis by Partitioning around Medoids (PAM) to Examine the Heterogeneity of Patients with Low Back Pain within Subgroups of the Treatment Based Classification System.\",\"authors\":\"Esmaeil Shokri,&nbsp;Mohsen Razeghi,&nbsp;Hadi Raeisi Shahraki,&nbsp;Reza Jalli,&nbsp;Alireza Motealleh\",\"doi\":\"10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2001-1047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current evidence in low back pain (LBP) focuses on population averages and traditional multivariate analyses to find the significant difference between variables. Such a focus actively obscured the heterogeneity and increased errors. Cluster analysis (CA) addresses the mentioned shortcomings by calculating the degree of similarity among the relevant variables of the different objects.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the agreement between the treatment-based classification (TBC) system and the equivalent 3 cluster typology created by partitioning around medoids (PAM) analysis.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, a convenient sample of 90 patients with low back pain (50 males and 40 females) aged 20 to 65 years was included in the study. The patients were selected based on the 21 criteria of 2007 TBC system. An equivalent 3 cluster typology (C3) was applied using PAM method. Cohen's Kappa was run to determine if there was agreement between the TBC system and the equivalent C3 typology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PAM analysis revealed the evidence of clustering for a C3 cluster typology with average Silhouette widths of 0.12. Cohen's Kappa revealed fair agreement between the TBC system and C3 cluster typology (Percent of agreement 61%, Kappa=0.36, <i>P</i><0.001). Selected criteria by PAM analysis were different with original TBC system.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Higher probability of chance agreement was observed between two classification methods. Significant inhomogeneity was observed in subgroups of the 2007 TBC system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/db/a2/JBPE-13-89.PMC9923237.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2001-1047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2001-1047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:目前关于腰痛(LBP)的证据主要集中在人群平均值和传统的多变量分析上,以发现变量之间的显著差异。这样的焦点积极地掩盖了异质性,增加了误差。聚类分析(CA)通过计算不同对象的相关变量之间的相似度来解决上述缺点。目的:本研究旨在评价基于治疗的分类(TBC)系统与通过围绕介质划分(PAM)分析建立的等效3聚类类型之间的一致性。材料与方法:在本横断面研究中,选取了90例年龄在20 - 65岁的腰痛患者(男性50例,女性40例)作为研究样本。根据2007 TBC系统的21项标准选择患者。采用PAM方法进行等效3聚类分类(C3)。Cohen的Kappa被用来确定TBC系统和等价的C3类型学之间是否存在一致性。结果:PAM分析显示C3聚类的证据,平均剪影宽度为0.12。Cohen’s Kappa揭示了TBC系统与C3簇类型之间的一致性(一致性百分比为61%,Kappa=0.36, p)。结论:两种分类方法之间的一致性概率较高。在2007 TBC系统的亚组中观察到显著的不均匀性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Use of Cluster Analysis by Partitioning around Medoids (PAM) to Examine the Heterogeneity of Patients with Low Back Pain within Subgroups of the Treatment Based Classification System.

Background: Current evidence in low back pain (LBP) focuses on population averages and traditional multivariate analyses to find the significant difference between variables. Such a focus actively obscured the heterogeneity and increased errors. Cluster analysis (CA) addresses the mentioned shortcomings by calculating the degree of similarity among the relevant variables of the different objects.

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the agreement between the treatment-based classification (TBC) system and the equivalent 3 cluster typology created by partitioning around medoids (PAM) analysis.

Material and methods: In this cross-sectional study, a convenient sample of 90 patients with low back pain (50 males and 40 females) aged 20 to 65 years was included in the study. The patients were selected based on the 21 criteria of 2007 TBC system. An equivalent 3 cluster typology (C3) was applied using PAM method. Cohen's Kappa was run to determine if there was agreement between the TBC system and the equivalent C3 typology.

Results: PAM analysis revealed the evidence of clustering for a C3 cluster typology with average Silhouette widths of 0.12. Cohen's Kappa revealed fair agreement between the TBC system and C3 cluster typology (Percent of agreement 61%, Kappa=0.36, P<0.001). Selected criteria by PAM analysis were different with original TBC system.

Conclusion: Higher probability of chance agreement was observed between two classification methods. Significant inhomogeneity was observed in subgroups of the 2007 TBC system.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering
Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering (JBPE) is a bimonthly peer-reviewed English-language journal that publishes high-quality basic sciences and clinical research (experimental or theoretical) broadly concerned with the relationship of physics to medicine and engineering.
期刊最新文献
A Neural Network-based Approach to Prediction of Preterm Birth using Non-invasive Tests. Altered Amplitude of Low-Frequency Fluctuations of rs-fMRI Signal followed by rTMS Analgesic Effects in Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) Patients. Comparative Evaluation of LED Light Application and Heat Generation with Three Different Wavelengths of Frequency on Soft Tissues in Bringing Faster Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Finite Element Model Study. Feasibility of Robot-Assistance Hand Physiotherapy in Post-Stroke Patients. Impact of Electronic Collimation on Reducing Unnecessary Patient Dose in Digital Radiography.
×
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