使用临床实践环境中常用的临床生物标志物的生物年龄预测模型的比较:人工智能技术与传统统计方法

C. Bae, Yoori Im, Jong-hwan Lee, Choong-Shik Park, Miyoung Kim, H. Kwon, Boseon Kim, Hye-Ri Park, Chunggak Lee, I. Kim, Jeonghoon Kim
{"title":"使用临床实践环境中常用的临床生物标志物的生物年龄预测模型的比较:人工智能技术与传统统计方法","authors":"C. Bae, Yoori Im, Jong-hwan Lee, Choong-Shik Park, Miyoung Kim, H. Kwon, Boseon Kim, Hye-Ri Park, Chunggak Lee, I. Kim, Jeonghoon Kim","doi":"10.3389/frans.2021.709589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this work, we used the health check-up data of more than 111,000 subjects for analysis, using only the data with all 35 variables entered. For the prediction of biological age, traditional statistical methods and four AI techniques (RF, XGB, SVR, and DNN), which are widely used recently, were simultaneously used to compare the predictive power. This study showed that AI models produced about 1.6 times stronger linear relationship on average than statistical models. In addition, the regression analysis on the predicted BA and CA revealed similar differences in terms of both the correlation coefficients (linear model: 0.831, polynomial model: 0.996, XGB model: 0.66, RF model: 0.927, SVR model: 0.787, DNN model: 0.998) and R 2 values. Through this work, we confirmed that AI techniques such as the DNN model outperformed traditional statistical methods in predicting biological age.","PeriodicalId":73063,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in analytical science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Biological Age Prediction Models Using Clinical Biomarkers Commonly Measured in Clinical Practice Settings: AI Techniques Vs. Traditional Statistical Methods\",\"authors\":\"C. Bae, Yoori Im, Jong-hwan Lee, Choong-Shik Park, Miyoung Kim, H. Kwon, Boseon Kim, Hye-Ri Park, Chunggak Lee, I. Kim, Jeonghoon Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frans.2021.709589\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this work, we used the health check-up data of more than 111,000 subjects for analysis, using only the data with all 35 variables entered. For the prediction of biological age, traditional statistical methods and four AI techniques (RF, XGB, SVR, and DNN), which are widely used recently, were simultaneously used to compare the predictive power. This study showed that AI models produced about 1.6 times stronger linear relationship on average than statistical models. In addition, the regression analysis on the predicted BA and CA revealed similar differences in terms of both the correlation coefficients (linear model: 0.831, polynomial model: 0.996, XGB model: 0.66, RF model: 0.927, SVR model: 0.787, DNN model: 0.998) and R 2 values. Through this work, we confirmed that AI techniques such as the DNN model outperformed traditional statistical methods in predicting biological age.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73063,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in analytical science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in analytical science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frans.2021.709589\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in analytical science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frans.2021.709589","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

在这项工作中,我们使用了111000多名受试者的健康检查数据进行分析,只使用了所有35个变量的数据。对于生物年龄的预测,同时使用传统的统计方法和最近广泛使用的四种人工智能技术(RF、XGB、SVR和DNN)来比较预测能力。这项研究表明,人工智能模型产生的线性关系平均是统计模型的1.6倍。此外,对预测的BA和CA的回归分析显示,相关系数(线性模型:0.831,多项式模型:0.996,XGB模型:0.66,RF模型:0.927,SVR模型:0.787,DNN模型:0.998)和R2值存在相似差异。通过这项工作,我们证实了DNN模型等人工智能技术在预测生物年龄方面优于传统的统计方法。
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
Comparison of Biological Age Prediction Models Using Clinical Biomarkers Commonly Measured in Clinical Practice Settings: AI Techniques Vs. Traditional Statistical Methods
In this work, we used the health check-up data of more than 111,000 subjects for analysis, using only the data with all 35 variables entered. For the prediction of biological age, traditional statistical methods and four AI techniques (RF, XGB, SVR, and DNN), which are widely used recently, were simultaneously used to compare the predictive power. This study showed that AI models produced about 1.6 times stronger linear relationship on average than statistical models. In addition, the regression analysis on the predicted BA and CA revealed similar differences in terms of both the correlation coefficients (linear model: 0.831, polynomial model: 0.996, XGB model: 0.66, RF model: 0.927, SVR model: 0.787, DNN model: 0.998) and R 2 values. Through this work, we confirmed that AI techniques such as the DNN model outperformed traditional statistical methods in predicting biological age.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Separation of isobaric phosphorothioate oligonucleotides in capillary electrophoresis: study of the influence of cationic cyclodextrins on chemo and stereoselectivity Simultaneous determination of small molecules and proteins in wastewater-based epidemiology A retrospective view on non-linear methods in chemometrics, and future directions A Bayesian approach for constituent estimation in nucleic acid mixture models Editorial: Plant-microbe omics
×
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