Classification methods for the identification of `case' in epidemiological diagnosis of asthma

The identification of the asthmatic `case' in epidemiological research is a controversial issue. This study was aimed at classifying asthmatic subjects using a statistical decision rule that minimised the misclassification rate with respect to the clinicians' diagnosis. The rule was defined by a combination of predictors that are easily observed in epidemiological studies (asthma-like questions, physiological tests) without necessarily including the clinical opinion of expert physicians. From pooled data on 1103 subjects at the three Italian centres of the European Community Respiratory Health Survey (ECRHS) a post-consensus clinicians' diagnosis of asthma was obtained, and seven predictors were selected from among 18 potential candidates (specificity ranged from 64 to 99%, but sensitivity ranged from 22 to 62%). This data set was processed with tree-structured classifier techniques (the Classification And Regression Trees, CART), classical discriminant analysis (Fisher's Linear Discriminant Function, LDF), and the neural network method (Multi-Layer Perceptron, MLP model). The results suggest that modifications of the `classification tree' provide a more useful decision rule, sensitive (93%) and specific (85%), than either LDF or MLP. The decision tree is readily interpretable from a clinical perspective and uses five out of the seven predictors (in descending hierarchical order: ever had asthma, current asthma, shortness of breath, atopy and wheezing and breathless). The findings seem to indicate a considerable success with respect to previous epidemiological studies and await repetition in other ECHRS populations.

[1]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap. , 1994 .

[2]  J. Carlin,et al.  Validation of questionnaire and bronchial hyperresponsiveness against respiratory physician assessment in the diagnosis of asthma. , 1996, International journal of epidemiology.

[3]  A. Marinoni Prevalence of asthma and asthma symptoms in a general population sample from northern Italy , 1995 .

[4]  D. Jarvis,et al.  The European Community Respiratory Health Survey II , 1994, European Respiratory Journal.

[5]  R. de Marco,et al.  Evaluation of methacholine dose-response curves by linear and exponential mathematical models: goodness-of-fit and validity of extrapolation. , 1996, The European respiratory journal.

[6]  David J. Hand,et al.  Construction and Assessment of Classification Rules , 1997 .

[7]  P. Burney,et al.  What symptoms predict the bronchial response to histamine? Evaluation in a community survey of the bronchial symptoms questionnaire (1984) of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease. , 1989, International journal of epidemiology.

[8]  L. Maccarini,et al.  Bronchial responsiveness to inhaled methacholine in epidemiological studies: comparison of different indices. , 1989, The European respiratory journal.

[9]  R. de Marco,et al.  An undetected burden of asthma in Italy: the relationship between clinical and epidemiological diagnosis of asthma. , 1998, The European respiratory journal.

[10]  C. Salome,et al.  Toward a definition of asthma for epidemiology. , 1992, The American review of respiratory disease.

[11]  R. de Marco,et al.  Nonresponse bias in EC Respiratory Health Survey in Italy. , 1994, The European respiratory journal.

[12]  R. de Marco,et al.  Inadequate antiasthma drug use in the north of Italy. , 1997, The European respiratory journal.

[13]  A. Lilienfeld,et al.  A study of variability in the interpretation of chest x-rays in the detection of lung cancer. , 1966, Cancer research.

[14]  M. Sears Descriptive epidemiology of asthma , 1997, The Lancet.

[15]  D. J. Hand,et al.  Screening vs prevalence estimation , 1987 .

[16]  J. Pepys "Atopy": a study in definition. , 1994, Allergy.