Reliability of self-reported risk factors for age-related brain disease
Tack, R. W.; Senff, J. R.; Kimball, T. N.; Prapiadou, S.; Yechoor, N.; Rosand, J.; Singh, S. S.; Anderson, C. D.
Show abstract
Importancemodifiable risk factors, including hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, kidney disease, hearing impairment, and being overweight, increase risk of stroke, dementia, and late life depression (LLD), but may be poorly understood by patients. ObjectiveTo aid in the design of brain health risk stratification tools, we aimed to determine whether self-reported modifiable risk factors can identify at-risk patients on a population level. Designcohort study using cross-sectional data of ten iterations of the National Health and Examination Surveys (NHANES) from 1999 to 2018. Analyses were conducted between February and April of 2024. SettingUS population-based cohorts Participantsall participants who had both questionnaire data and objective measurements available. Exposurewe collected data on answers to common questions and compared these to objectively measured risk factors for age-related brain disease. Main outcomes and measureswe compared answers to simple questions to objectively measured risk factors. We reported means and 95% confidence intervals of objective measurements, created confusion matrices to determine common metrics, and compared performance of individual questions. We defined a question reliable if performance, measured through F1 scores, was > 0.7, as moderately reliable if F1 score was 0.5-0.7 and as unreliable if F1 score was < 0.5. ResultsParticipants with both objective measurements and questionnaire data ranged from 16,966 (median age 32, 9,113 [20%] black, 19,993 [45%] white) in hearing impairment to 63,834 (median age 39, 14,156 [22%] black, 25,754 [40%] white) in diabetes. Mean values of objective measurements were significantly increased across all risk factors in patients that responded "Yes" to common questions on their presence compared to those who answered "No". Performance of questions in identifying at-risk patients measured by F1 score was 0.25 in kidney disease, 0.44 in hypercholesterolemia, 0.56 in hypertension, 0.59 in hearing impairment, 0.71 in diabetes and 0.81 in being overweight. Conclusion and relevancein this study of multiple cohorts of up to 63,834 Americans, self-reported awareness of meeting clinical criteria for diabetes or being overweight were reliable, hypertension or hearing impairment were moderately reliable, and hypercholesterolemia or kidney disease were unreliable. These results could be used to guide construction of risk factor screening tools.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Can machine learning improve risk prediction of incident hypertension? An internal method comparison and external validation of the Framingham risk model using HUNT Study data 93%
- Nationwide prediction of type 2 diabetes comorbidities 93%
- What multiple Mendelian randomization approaches reveal about obesity and gout 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Estimating Heritability of Glycaemic Response to Metformin using Nationwide Electronic Health Records and Population-Sized Pedigree 91%
- Precision Prognostics for Cardiovascular Disease in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis 91%
- Systematic review of precision subclassification of type 2 diabetes 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Differences in estimates for ten-year risk of cardiovascular disease in Black versus white persons with identical risk factor profiles using pooled cohort equations 92%
- Predictive performance and clinical application of COV50, a urinary proteomic biomarker in early COVID-19 infection: a cohort study 91%
- An external validation of the QCovid risk prediction algorithm for risk of mortality from COVID-19 in adults: national validation cohort study in England 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Novel type 2 diabetes prediction score based on traditional risk factors and circulating metabolites: Model derivation and validation in two large cohort studies 91%
- Determining the Impact of Ethnicity on the Accuracy of Measurements of Oxygen Saturations. A Retrospective Cohort Study 89%
- Changes to the sebum lipidome upon COVID-19 infection observed via non-invasive and rapid sampling from the skin 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trends in cognitive function before and after diabetes onset in China 91%
- Diabetes mellitus, glycemic traits, and cerebrovascular disease: a Mendelian randomization study 91%
- Interplay between Chronic Kidney disease, Hypertension, and Stroke: Insights from a Multivariable Mendelian Randomization Analysis 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.