Self-reported diagnoses as training labels for finding uncoded chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, and endometriosis in the All of Us Research Program
Asiaee, A.; Aryan, K.
Show abstract
Objective: Case-finding models for underdiagnosed conditions are usually trained on diagnosis codes, which are missing from the records of many patients with a clinical diagnosis. We asked whether models trained on self-reported diagnoses rank uncoded self-reporters higher than models trained on later codes, and how a score fit only from released summary counts compares with a participant-level model. Methods: In the All of Us Research Program, we followed survey respondents with no qualifying diagnosis code by the survey date for later codes. For chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, and endometriosis (participants recorded as female at birth), we fit a naive Bayes score with empirical-Bayes shrinkage, from released feature-by-label counts for the self-reported diagnosis and from exact counts inside the data enclave for a later code, and an elastic net on participant-level data for each label. In a random 20% validation split, we measured discrimination of self-report, of uncoded self-reporters (no qualifying code observed), and of later codes. Results: For chronic fatigue (149,860 respondents, including 7,770 self-reporters, 95% with no code observed), the summary-count score trained on self-report ranked uncoded self-reporters with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.72-0.75), against 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.69) when trained on later codes. For later codes, the two scores were similar (0.69 vs 0.70). Fibromyalgia showed the same pattern (0.73 vs 0.64 and 0.74 vs 0.72). Elastic nets trained on self-report ranked uncoded self-reporters higher than the summary-count scores (0.80 vs 0.74 and 0.78 vs 0.73) but discriminated later codes less well than code-trained elastic nets. For endometriosis, the self-report score also ranked uncoded self-reporters above the code-trained score (0.61 vs 0.53), but discrimination was low and it did not discriminate later codes (0.50 vs 0.70). Conclusion: The choice of training label changes which patients a case-finding model ranks highly. For all 3 conditions, self-reported diagnoses were the more useful label for finding uncoded self-reporters. For chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia, the self-report score also discriminated later codes as well as the code-trained score. Independent clinical validation is needed before these models guide case finding.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Predicting critical state after COVID-19 diagnosis: Model development using a large US electronic health record dataset 94%
- Machine Learning Generalizability Across Healthcare Settings: Insights from multi-site COVID-19 screening 92%
- COVID-19 diagnosis prediction by symptoms of tested individuals: a machine learning approach 92%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Machine learning models predict long COVID outcomes based on baseline clinical and immunologic factors 91%
- Extraction of Crohn's Disease Clinical Phenotypes from Clinical Text Using Natural Language Processing 90%
- Systematic Review of Large Language Models for Patient Care: Current Applications and Challenges 90%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- US Primary Care in 2029: A Delphi Survey on the Impact of Machine Learning 92%
- Optimising supervised machine learning algorithms predicting cigarette cravings and lapses for a smoking cessation just-in-time adaptive intervention (JITAI) 92%
- Robust Disease Prognosis via Diagnostic Knowledge Preservation: A Sequential Learning Approach 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.