Predicting Common Audiological Functional Parameters (CAFPAs) as Interpretable Intermediate Representation in a Clinical Decision-Support System for Audiology

The application of machine learning for the development of clinical decision-support systems in audiology provides the potential to improve the objectivity and precision of clinical experts' diagnostic decisions. However, for successful clinical application, such a tool needs to be accurate, as well as accepted and trusted by physicians. In the field of audiology, large amounts of patients' data are being measured, but these are distributed over local clinical databases and are heterogeneous with respect to the applied assessment tools. For the purpose of integrating across different databases, the Common Audiological Functional Parameters (CAFPAs) were recently established as abstract representations of the contained audiological information describing relevant functional aspects of the human auditory system. As an intermediate layer in a clinical decision-support system for audiology, the CAFPAs aim at maintaining interpretability to the potential users. Thus far, the CAFPAs were derived by experts from audiological measures. For designing a clinical decision-support system, in a next step the CAFPAs need to be automatically derived from available data of individual patients. Therefore, the present study aims at predicting the expert generated CAFPA labels using three different machine learning models, namely the lasso regression, elastic nets, and random forests. Furthermore, the importance of different audiological measures for the prediction of specific CAFPAs is examined and interpreted. The trained models are then used to predict CAFPAs for unlabeled data not seen by experts. Prediction of unlabeled cases is evaluated by means of model-based clustering methods. Results indicate an adequate prediction of the ten distinct CAFPAs. All models perform comparably and turn out to be suitable choices for the prediction of CAFPAs. They also generalize well to unlabeled data. Additionally, the extracted relevant features are plausible for the respective CAFPAs, facilitating interpretability of the predictions. Based on the trained models, a prototype of a clinical decision-support system in audiology can be implemented and extended towards clinical databases in the future.

[1]  Xinyu D Song,et al.  Online Machine Learning Audiometry. , 2019, Ear and hearing.

[2]  J. Kessler,et al.  DemTect: a new, sensitive cognitive screening test to support the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and early dementia , 2004, International journal of geriatric psychiatry.

[3]  P. Royston,et al.  Patrick Royston model with a binary outcome A comparison of imputation techniques for handling missing predictor values in a risk , 2007 .

[4]  T. Yin,et al.  A matter of time: internal delays in binaural processing , 2007, Trends in Neurosciences.

[5]  P. Croskerry The Importance of Cognitive Errors in Diagnosis and Strategies to Minimize Them , 2003, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[6]  D. Rubin,et al.  The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects , 1983 .

[7]  Andy Liaw,et al.  Classification and Regression by randomForest , 2007 .

[8]  Brian A. Lawlor,et al.  Association of Age-Related Hearing Loss With Cognitive Function, Cognitive Impairment, and Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2017, JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery.

[9]  Johannes Gehrke,et al.  Intelligible Models for HealthCare: Predicting Pneumonia Risk and Hospital 30-day Readmission , 2015, KDD.

[10]  Clive E Sabel Encyclopedia of Health, Illness, Behavior, and Society , 2013 .

[11]  Steen Andreassen,et al.  Improving empirical antibiotic treatment using TREAT, a computerized decision support system: cluster randomized trial. , 2006, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[12]  B Kollmeier,et al.  Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Omid Majdani,et al.  Common Audiological Functional Parameters (CAFPAs): statistical and compact representation of rehabilitative audiological classification based on expert knowledge , 2019, International journal of audiology.

[14]  Meredith Lawley,et al.  Factors influencing decision support system acceptance , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..

[15]  S. Corbridge,et al.  Enhancing clinical decision making: development of a contiguous definition and conceptual framework. , 2014, Journal of professional nursing : official journal of the American Association of Colleges of Nursing.

[16]  A Winter,et al.  Decision support in medicine: a survey of problems of user acceptance. , 2000, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[17]  Xiaoyan Chen,et al.  Validation of a guideline-based decision support system for the diagnosis of primary headache disorders based on ICHD-3 beta , 2014, The Journal of Headache and Pain.

[18]  Anna Warzybok,et al.  Common Audiological Functional Parameters (CAFPAs) for single patient cases: deriving statistical models from an expert-labelled data set , 2020, International journal of audiology.

[19]  Torsten Dau,et al.  Data-Driven Approach for Auditory Profiling and Characterization of Individual Hearing Loss , 2018, Trends in hearing.

[20]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  Model-based clustering and data transformations for gene expression data , 2001, Bioinform..

[21]  Marco Caliendo,et al.  Some Practical Guidance for the Implementation of Propensity Score Matching , 2005, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[22]  U. Grömping Dependence of Variable Importance in Random Forests on the Shape of the Regressor Space , 2009 .

[23]  Constantine Frangakis,et al.  Multiple imputation by chained equations: what is it and how does it work? , 2011, International journal of methods in psychiatric research.

[24]  Hans Colonius,et al.  Auditory and Non-Auditory Contributions for Unaided Speech Recognition in Noise as a Function of Hearing Aid Use , 2017, Front. Psychol..

[25]  Anna Warzybok,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of automatic audiological classification using expert-labelled audiological data and Common Audiological Functional Parameters , 2020, International journal of audiology.

[26]  Alexander Jung,et al.  An Information-Theoretic Approach to Personalized Explainable Machine Learning , 2020, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[27]  Joachim Winkler,et al.  Adjustierung des Sozialen-Schicht-Index für die Anwendung im Kinder- und Jugendgesundheitssurvey (KiGGS) , 2009 .

[28]  E. Mohammadi,et al.  Barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of a physiological track and trigger system: A systematic review of the qualitative evidence , 2017, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[29]  Tom C. T. Yin,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Encoding Binaural Localization Cues in the Auditory Brainstem , 2002 .

[30]  Frederick W. Oehme,et al.  Clinical reasoning in the health professions , 1996 .

[31]  Hari M. Bharadwaj,et al.  Cochlear neuropathy and the coding of supra-threshold sound , 2014, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[32]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  mclust Version 4 for R : Normal Mixture Modeling for Model-Based Clustering , Classification , and Density Estimation , 2012 .

[33]  Dhruv Khullar,et al.  Reducing Diagnostic Errors--Why Now? , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  Astakhov,et al.  Biomedical Informatics , 2009, Methods in Molecular Biology™.

[35]  Kilian Q. Weinberger,et al.  Fast, Continuous Audiogram Estimation Using Machine Learning , 2015, Ear and hearing.

[36]  D. Ruppert The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction , 2004 .

[37]  Stef van Buuren,et al.  MICE: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R , 2011 .

[38]  Constantin F. Aliferis,et al.  An evaluation of machine-learning methods for predicting pneumonia mortality , 1997, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[39]  S. Sears,et al.  Critical Analysis , 2014 .

[40]  John A. Albertini,et al.  Deafness and Hearing Loss , 2010 .

[41]  D. Lamond,et al.  The treatment of pressure sores: a comparison of novice and expert nurses' knowledge, information use and decision accuracy. , 1998, Journal of advanced nursing.

[42]  M. Guha The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Health, Illness, Behavior and Society , 2014 .

[43]  Ankur Teredesai,et al.  Interpretable Machine Learning in Healthcare , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI).

[44]  I. Kohane,et al.  Big Data and Machine Learning in Health Care. , 2018, JAMA.

[45]  Heng Tao Shen,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[46]  Fred D. Davis User Acceptance of Information Technology: System Characteristics, User Perceptions and Behavioral Impacts , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[47]  Steven Cumming,et al.  Inter and intra-reader variability in the threshold estimation of auditory brainstem response (ABR) results , 2016 .

[48]  G. Paludetti,et al.  A review of new insights on the association between hearing loss and cognitive decline in ageing , 2016, Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale.

[49]  David T. Marc,et al.  Reasons For Physicians Not Adopting Clinical Decision Support Systems: Critical Analysis , 2018, JMIR medical informatics.

[50]  Robert H Eikelboom,et al.  Clinical decision support systems and computer-aided diagnosis in otology , 2007, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[51]  A. Elstein,et al.  Clinical reasoning in medicine. , 1995 .

[52]  Zhiping Walter,et al.  Physician acceptance of information technologies: Role of perceived threat to professional autonomy , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[53]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  Model-Based Clustering, Discriminant Analysis, and Density Estimation , 2002 .

[54]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  An adaptive procedure for categorical loudness scaling. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[55]  Carlo DeAngelis,et al.  Inter-rater reliability in performance status assessment among health care professionals: a systematic review. , 2016, Annals of palliative medicine.

[56]  Thomas Brand,et al.  Optimized loudness-function estimation for categorical loudness scaling data , 2014, Hearing Research.

[57]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  Enhanced Model-Based Clustering, Density Estimation, and Discriminant Analysis Software: MCLUST , 2003, J. Classif..

[58]  S. Gelfand Essentials of Audiology , 1997 .