Dataset Information

Chronic stress in practice assistants: An analytic approach comparing four machine learning classifiers with a standard logistic regression model.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Occupational stress is associated with adverse outcomes for medical professionals and patients. In our cross-sectional study with 136 general practices, 26.4% of 550 practice assistants showed high chronic stress. As machine learning strategies offer the opportunity to improve understanding of chronic stress by exploiting complex interactions between variables, we used data from our previous study to derive the best analytic model for chronic stress: four common machine learning (ML) approaches are compared to a classical statistical procedure.

Methods

We applied four machine learning classifiers (random forest, support vector machine, K-nearest neighbors', and artificial neural network) and logistic regression as standard approach to analyze factors contributing to chronic stress in practice assistants. Chronic stress had been measured by the standardized, self-administered TICS-SSCS questionnaire. The performance of these models was compared in terms of predictive accuracy based on the 'operating area under the curve' (AUC), sensitivity, and positive predictive value.

Findings

Compared to the standard logistic regression model (AUC 0.636, 95% CI 0.490-0.674), all machine learning models improved prediction: random forest +20.8% (AUC 0.844, 95% CI 0.684-0.843), artificial neural network +12.4% (AUC 0.760, 95% CI 0.605-0.777), support vector machine +15.1% (AUC 0.787, 95% CI 0.634-0.802), and K-nearest neighbours +7.1% (AUC 0.707, 95% CI 0.556-0.735). As best prediction model, random forest showed a sensitivity of 99% and a positive predictive value of 79%. Using the variable frequencies at the decision nodes of the random forest model, the following five work characteristics influence chronic stress: too much work, high demand to concentrate, time pressure, complicated tasks, and insufficient support by practice leaders.

Conclusions

Regarding chronic stress prediction, machine learning classifiers, especially random forest, provided more accurate prediction compared to classical logistic regression. Interventions to reduce chronic stress in practice personnel should primarily address the identified workplace characteristics.

SUBMITTER: Bozorgmehr A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8096078 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo predict preterm birth in nulliparous women using logistic regression and machine learning.DesignPopulation-based retrospective cohort.ParticipantsNulliparous women (N = 112,963) with a singleton gestation who gave birth between 20-42 weeks gestation in Ontario hospitals from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2014.MethodsWe used data during the first and second trimesters to build logistic regression and machine learning models in a "training" sample to predict overall and spontaneous preterm birth. We assessed model performance using various measures of accuracy including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in an independent "validation" sample.ResultsDuring the first trimester, logistic regression identified 13 variables associated with preterm birth, of which the strongest predictors were diabetes (Type I: adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 4.21; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.23-5.42; Type II: AOR: 2.68; 95% CI: 2.05-3.46) and abnormal pregnancy-associated plasma protein A concentration (AOR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.80-2.30). During the first trimester, the maximum AUC was 60% (95% CI: 58-62%) with artificial neural networks in the validation sample. During the second trimester, 17 variables were significantly associated with preterm birth, among which complications during pregnancy had the highest AOR (13.03; 95% CI: 12.21-13.90). During the second trimester, the AUC increased to 65% (95% CI: 63-66%) with artificial neural networks in the validation sample. Including complications during the pregnancy yielded an AUC of 80% (95% CI: 79-81%) with artificial neural networks. All models yielded 94-97% negative predictive values for spontaneous PTB during the first and second trimesters.ConclusionAlthough artificial neural networks provided slightly higher AUC than logistic regression, prediction of preterm birth in the first trimester remained elusive. However, including data from the second trimester improved prediction to a moderate level by both logistic regression and machine learning approaches.

Project description:BackgroundMany problems in bioinformatics involve classification based on features such as sequence, structure or morphology. Given multiple classifiers, two crucial questions arise: how does their performance compare, and how can they best be combined to produce a better classifier? A classifier can be evaluated in terms of sensitivity and specificity using benchmark, or gold standard, data, that is, data for which the true classification is known. However, a gold standard is not always available. Here we demonstrate that a Bayesian model for comparing medical diagnostics without a gold standard can be successfully applied in the bioinformatics domain, to genomic scale data sets. We present a new implementation, which unlike previous implementations is applicable to any number of classifiers. We apply this model, for the first time, to the problem of finding the globally optimal logical combination of classifiers.ResultsWe compared three classifiers of protein subcellular localisation, and evaluated our estimates of sensitivity and specificity against estimates obtained using a gold standard. The method overestimated sensitivity and specificity with only a small discrepancy, and correctly ranked the classifiers. Diagnostic tests for swine flu were then compared on a small data set. Lastly, classifiers for a genome-wide association study of macular degeneration with 541094 SNPs were analysed. In all cases, run times were feasible, and results precise. The optimal logical combination of classifiers was also determined for all three data sets. Code and data are available from http://bioinformatics.monash.edu.au/downloads/.ConclusionsThe examples demonstrate the methods are suitable for both small and large data sets, applicable to the wide range of bioinformatics classification problems, and robust to dependence between classifiers. In all three test cases, the globally optimal logical combination of the classifiers was found to be their union, according to three out of four ranking criteria. We propose as a general rule of thumb that the union of classifiers will be close to optimal.