Cargando…

Prediction of Chronic Lower Back Pain Using the Hierarchical Neural Network: Comparison with Logistic Regression—A Pilot Study

Background: Many studies have reported on the causes of chronic lower back pain (CLBP). The aim of this study is to identify if the hierarchical neural network (HNN) is superior to a conventional statistical model for CLBP prediction. Linear models, which included multiple regression analysis, were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Owari, Yutaka, Miyatake, Nobuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6630563/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31181815
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina55060259
Descripción
Sumario:Background: Many studies have reported on the causes of chronic lower back pain (CLBP). The aim of this study is to identify if the hierarchical neural network (HNN) is superior to a conventional statistical model for CLBP prediction. Linear models, which included multiple regression analysis, were executed for the analysis of the survey data because of the ease of interpretation. The problem with such linear models was that we could not fully consider the influence of interactions caused by a combination of nonlinear relationships and independent variables. Materials and Methods: The subjects in our study were 96 people (30 men aged 72.3 ± 5.6 years and 66 women aged 71.9 ± 5.4 years) who participated at a college health club from 20 July 2016 to 20 March 2017. The HNN and the logistic regression analysis (LR) were used for the prediction of CLBP and the accuracy of each analysis was compared and examined by using our previously reported data. The LR verified the fit using the Hosmer–Lemeshow test. The efficiencies of the two models were compared using receiver performance analysis (ROC), the root mean square error (RMSE), and the deviance (−2 log likelihood). Results: The area under the ROC curve, the RMSE, and the −2 log likelihood for the LR were 0.7163, 0.2581, and 105.065, respectively. The area under the ROC curve, the RMSE, and the log likelihood for the HNN were 0.7650, 0.2483, and 102.787, respectively (the correct answer rates were HNN = 73.3% and LR = 70.8%). Conclusions: On the basis of the ROC curve, the RMSE, and the −2 log likelihood, the performance of the HNN for the prediction probability of CLBP is equal to or higher than the LR. In the future, the HNN may be useful as an index to judge the risk of CLBP for individual patients.