Use of an artificial neural network (ANN) for classifying nursing care needed, using incomplete input data
Abstract
Background In German nursing insurance, the act of classifying the client into four categories of disability is based on legally defined distinct criteria. When classifying deceased persons it is often impossible to collect all the required information. Primary objective We aimed to determine the ability of an artificial neural network (ANN) to calculate the category of disability, to investigate the response of the ANN to input items of different nature, quantity and data quality, and to estimate the minimum number of training data required. Research design The investigation was conducted as a retrospective observational study. Methods and procedures The analysis was based on routine records of 14000 adult clients of the nursing insurance. Several ANNs were trained, varying nature, number and quality of the input items as well as the size of the training data set. Each ANN's classification competence was tested on independent validation data, judging the ANN's conformance to the result of the individual expert assessment, using kappa statistics. Main results Fed with all 30 input items available, the net classified 80% of cases correctly (weighted kappa = 0.78). Using three input items, weighted kappa was 0.63. Severe misclassification (deviation by more than one category in either direction) ranged between 0.2% (all 30 input items) and 3.7% (3/30 items). The less complete the individual input items were, the less accurate was the net's estimate. A 20% rate of missing values…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The most prominent data quality dimension in the DL papers is amount of data, which is empirically shown to benefit performance, albeit in a saturating manner.
“The most prominent dimension is amount of data123–126,129,146–159,183–189 which is empirically shown to benefit performance, albeit in a saturating manner.”
From The METRIC-framework for assessing data quality for trustworthy AI in medicine: A systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [125]
Another dominant topic in the DL papers is completeness, which the ML community almost exclusively refers to as missing data.
“Another dominant topic is completeness to which the ML community almost exclusively refers to as missing data119,125–128,133–135,182.”
From The METRIC-framework for assessing data quality for trustworthy AI in medicine: A systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [125]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The METRIC-framework for assessing data quality for trustworthy AI in medicine: A systematic review
Schwabe, D., Becker, K., Seyferth, M., Klaß, A., & Schaeffter, T. (2024) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01196-4 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
- Authors
- Michel, E., Zernikow, B., & Wichert, S. A.
- Affiliations
- Emma Kinderziekenhuis (NL)
- Witten/Herdecke University (DE)
- ORCID
- Zernikow, B.
- Venue
- Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2000-01
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 147-158
- ISSN
- 1463-9238 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2133422490
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 1.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Data Mining and Machine Learning Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Keywords
- artificial neural networks, disability categories, long-term care insurance, missing data, deceased persons, training data size, quality control
- MeSH terms
- Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Disability Evaluation, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Germany, Humans, Nursing Care, Retrospective Studies, Software Validation, Neural Networks, Computer, Insurance, Disability
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review