Cargando…

Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to compare empirically predictive ability of an artificial neural network with a logistic regression in prediction of low back pain. METHODS: Data from the second national health survey were considered in this investigation. This data includes the in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parsaeian, M, Mohammad, K, Mahmoudi, M, Zeraati, H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3469002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23113198
_version_ 1782246020775673856
author Parsaeian, M
Mohammad, K
Mahmoudi, M
Zeraati, H
author_facet Parsaeian, M
Mohammad, K
Mahmoudi, M
Zeraati, H
author_sort Parsaeian, M
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to compare empirically predictive ability of an artificial neural network with a logistic regression in prediction of low back pain. METHODS: Data from the second national health survey were considered in this investigation. This data includes the information of low back pain and its associated risk factors among Iranian people aged 15 years and older. Artificial neural network and logistic regression models were developed using a set of 17294 data and they were validated in a test set of 17295 data. Hosmer and Lemeshow recommendation for model selection was used in fitting the logistic regression. A three-layer perceptron with 9 inputs, 3 hidden and 1 output neurons was employed. The efficiency of two models was compared by receiver operating characteristic analysis, root mean square and -2 Loglikelihood criteria. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve (SE), root mean square and -2Loglikelihood of the logistic regression was 0.752 (0.004), 0.3832 and 14769.2, respectively. The area under the ROC curve (SE), root mean square and -2Loglikelihood of the artificial neural network was 0.754 (0.004), 0.3770 and 14757.6, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these three criteria, artificial neural network would give better performance than logistic regression. Although, the difference is statistically significant, it does not seem to be clinically significant.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3469002
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34690022012-10-30 Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey Parsaeian, M Mohammad, K Mahmoudi, M Zeraati, H Iran J Public Health Original Articles BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to compare empirically predictive ability of an artificial neural network with a logistic regression in prediction of low back pain. METHODS: Data from the second national health survey were considered in this investigation. This data includes the information of low back pain and its associated risk factors among Iranian people aged 15 years and older. Artificial neural network and logistic regression models were developed using a set of 17294 data and they were validated in a test set of 17295 data. Hosmer and Lemeshow recommendation for model selection was used in fitting the logistic regression. A three-layer perceptron with 9 inputs, 3 hidden and 1 output neurons was employed. The efficiency of two models was compared by receiver operating characteristic analysis, root mean square and -2 Loglikelihood criteria. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve (SE), root mean square and -2Loglikelihood of the logistic regression was 0.752 (0.004), 0.3832 and 14769.2, respectively. The area under the ROC curve (SE), root mean square and -2Loglikelihood of the artificial neural network was 0.754 (0.004), 0.3770 and 14757.6, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these three criteria, artificial neural network would give better performance than logistic regression. Although, the difference is statistically significant, it does not seem to be clinically significant. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2012-06-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3469002/ /pubmed/23113198 Text en Copyright © Iranian Public Health Association & Tehran University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0), which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Parsaeian, M
Mohammad, K
Mahmoudi, M
Zeraati, H
Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey
title Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey
title_full Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey
title_fullStr Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey
title_short Comparison of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network in Low Back Pain Prediction: Second National Health Survey
title_sort comparison of logistic regression and artificial neural network in low back pain prediction: second national health survey
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3469002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23113198
work_keys_str_mv AT parsaeianm comparisonoflogisticregressionandartificialneuralnetworkinlowbackpainpredictionsecondnationalhealthsurvey
AT mohammadk comparisonoflogisticregressionandartificialneuralnetworkinlowbackpainpredictionsecondnationalhealthsurvey
AT mahmoudim comparisonoflogisticregressionandartificialneuralnetworkinlowbackpainpredictionsecondnationalhealthsurvey
AT zeraatih comparisonoflogisticregressionandartificialneuralnetworkinlowbackpainpredictionsecondnationalhealthsurvey