Quantifying the Contributions of Training Data and Algorithm Logic to the Performance of Automated Cause-assignment Algorithms for Verbal Autopsy.

A verbal autopsy (VA) consists of a survey with a relative or close contact of a person who has recently died. VA surveys are commonly used to infer likely causes of death for individuals when deaths happen outside of hospitals or healthcare facilities. Several statistical and algorithmic methods are available to assign cause of death using VA surveys. Each of these methods require as inputs some information about the joint distribution of symptoms and causes. In this note, we examine the generalizability of this symptom-cause information by comparing different automated coding methods using various combinations of inputs and evaluation data. VA algorithm performance is affected by both the specific SCI themselves and the logic of a given algorithm. Using a variety of performance metrics for all existing VA algorithms, we demonstrate that in general the adequacy of the information about the joint distribution between symptoms and cause affects performance at least as much or more than algorithm logic.

[1]  Ying Lu,et al.  Verbal Autopsy Methods with Multiple Causes of Death , 2008, 0808.0645.

[2]  Samuel J. Clark,et al.  Probabilistic Cause-of-Death Assignment Using Verbal Autopsies , 2014, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[3]  P. Byass,et al.  Revealing the burden of maternal mortality: a probabilistic model for determining pregnancy-related causes of death from verbal autopsies , 2007, Population health metrics.

[4]  Rafael Lozano,et al.  Robust metrics for assessing the performance of different verbal autopsy cause assignment methods in validation studies , 2011, Population health metrics.

[5]  Alan D. Lopez,et al.  Improving performance of the Tariff Method for assigning causes of death to verbal autopsies , 2015, BMC Medicine.

[6]  M. Friedman The Use of Ranks to Avoid the Assumption of Normality Implicit in the Analysis of Variance , 1937 .

[7]  Alexander Y. Shestopaloff,et al.  Naive Bayes classifiers for verbal autopsies: comparison to physician-based classification for 21,000 child and adult deaths , 2015, BMC Medicine.

[8]  Abraham D Flaxman,et al.  Performance of the Tariff Method: validation of a simple additive algorithm for analysis of verbal autopsies , 2011, Population health metrics.

[9]  P. Byass,et al.  Strengthening standardised interpretation of verbal autopsy data: the new InterVA-4 tool. , 2012, Global health action.

[10]  Rajendra Prasad,et al.  Population Health Metrics Research Consortium gold standard verbal autopsy validation study: design, implementation, and development of analysis datasets , 2011, Population health metrics.