Cited by 22Human Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisData-Driven Disease SurveillanceArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Predicting the Spatio-Temporal Evolution of Chronic Diseases in Population with Human Mobility Data

Open access
Wang, Yingzi, Zhou, Xiao, Noulas, Anastasios, Mascolo, Cecilia, Xie, Xing, Chen, Enhong·2018·Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Chronic diseases like cancer and diabetes are major threats to human life. Understanding the distribution and progression of chronic diseases of a population is important in assisting the allocation of medical resources as well as the design of policies in preemptive healthcare. Traditional methods to obtain large scale indicators on population health, e.g., surveys and statistical analysis, can be costly and time-consuming and often lead to a coarse spatio-temporal picture. In this paper, we leverage a dataset describing the human mobility patterns of citizens in a large metropolitan area. By viewing local human lifestyles we predict the evolution rate of several chronic diseases at the level of a city neighborhood. We apply the combination of a collaborative topic modeling (CTM) and a Gaussian mixture method (GMM) to tackle the data sparsity challenge and achieve robust predictions on health conditions simultaneously. Our method enables the analysis and prediction of disease rate evolution at fine spatio-temporal scales and demonstrates the potential of incorporating datasets from mobile web sources to improve population health monitoring. Evaluations using real-world check-in and chronic disease morbidity datasets in the city of London show that the proposed CTM+GMM model outperforms various baseline methods.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24963/ijcai.2018/497

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Cho et al., 2011] Eunjoon Cho, Seth A. Myers, and Jure Leskovec. Friendship and mobility: User movement in location-based social networks. In SIGKDD, pages 1082- 1090, 2011.
  2. Etuk and others, 2010] EU Etuk et al. Animals models for studying diabetes mellitus. Agric Biol JN Am, 1(2):130- 134, 2010.
  3. Friedman and Russell, 1997] Nir Friedman and Stuart Rus- sell. Image segmentation in video sequences: A proba- bilistic approach. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth confer- ence on UAI, pages 175-181.
  4. Gao et al., 2012] Huiji Gao, Jiliang Tang, and Huan Liu. gscorr: Modeling geo-social correlations for new check- ins on location-based social networks. In CIKM, pages 1582-1586, 2012.
  5. Muliyala and Varghese, 2010] Krishna Prasad Muliyala and Mathew Varghese. The complex relationship between de- pression and dementia. Annals of Indian Academy of Neu- rology, 13(Suppl2):S69, 2010.
  6. Rehurek and Sojka, 2010] Radim Rehurek and Petr Sojka. Software Framework for Topic Modelling with Large Cor- pora. In Proceedings of the LREC 2010 Workshop on New Challenges for NLP Frameworks, pages 45-50, May 2010.
  7. Salakhutdinov and Mnih, 2007] Ruslan Salakhutdinov and Andriy Mnih. Probabilistic matrix factorization. In Nips, volume 1, pages 2-1, 2007.
  8. Rebecca L Siegel, Kimberly D Miller, and Ahmedin Jemal. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 65(1):5-29, 2015.
  9. Chong Wang and David M Blei. Col- laborative topic modeling for recommending scientific ar- ticles. In SIGKDD, pages 448-456. ACM, 2011.
  10. Yingzi Wang, Nicholas Jing Yuan, Defu Lian, Linli Xu, Xing Xie, Enhong Chen, and Yong Rui. Regularity and conformity: Location prediction using het- erogeneous mobility data. In SIGKDD, pages 1275-1284, 2015.
  11. Nicholas Jing Yuan, Fuzheng Zhang, Defu Lian, Kai Zheng, Siyu Yu, and Xing Xie. We know how you live: exploring the spectrum of urban lifestyles. In COSN, pages 3-14. ACM, 2013.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, Y., Zhou, X., Noulas, A., Mascolo, C., Xie, X., & Chen, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Cambridge
Venue
Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2018-07
Pages
3578-3584
OpenAlex
W4233723981
Cited by
22
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4
FWCI
6.85
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo
Funders
University of Cambridge
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Human Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Data-Driven Disease Surveillance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
chronic disease prediction, human mobility, Gaussian mixture model, data sparsity, population health monitoring, check-in data, cancer, diabetes mellitus

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