Cargando…
Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Fatty Acid Classes in Popular US Snacks Using NHANES Data
In the US, people frequently snack between meals, consuming calorie-dense foods including baked goods (cakes), sweets, and desserts (ice cream) high in lipids, salt, and sugar. Monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA) and polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) are reasonably healthy; however, excessive consumpt...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10421424/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37571247 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu15153310 |
Sumario: | In the US, people frequently snack between meals, consuming calorie-dense foods including baked goods (cakes), sweets, and desserts (ice cream) high in lipids, salt, and sugar. Monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA) and polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) are reasonably healthy; however, excessive consumption of food high in saturated fatty acid (SFA) has been related to an elevated risk of cardiovascular diseases. The National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES) uses a 24 h recall to collect information on people’s food habits in the US. The complexity of the NHANES data necessitates using machine learning (ML) methods, a branch of data science that uses algorithms to collect large, unstructured, and structured data sets and identify correlations between the data variables. This study focused on determining the ability of ML regression models including artificial neural networks (ANNs), decision trees (DTs), k-nearest neighbors (KNNs), and support vector machines (SVMs) to assess the variability in total fat content concerning the classes (SFA, MUFA, and PUFA) of US-consumed snacks between 2017 and 2018. KNNs and DTs predicted SFA, MUFA, and PUFA with mean squared error (MSE) of 0.707, 0.489, 0.612, and 1.172, 0.846, 0.738, respectively. SVMs failed to predict the fatty acids accurately; however, ANNs performed satisfactorily. Using ensemble methods, DTs (10.635, 5.120, 7.075) showed higher error values for MSE than linear regression (LiR) (9.086, 3.698, 5.820) for SFA, MUFA, and PUFA prediction, respectively. R(2) score ranged between −0.541 to 0.983 and 0.390 to 0.751 for models one and two, respectively. Extreme gradient boost (XGR), Light gradient boost (LightGBM), and random forest (RF) performed better than LiR, with RF having the lowest score for MSE in predicting all the fatty acid classes. |
---|