| Literature DB >> 31234938 |
Leili Tapak1, Omid Hamidi2, Mohsen Fathian3, Manoochehr Karami4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Forecasting the time of future outbreaks would minimize the impact of diseases by taking preventive steps including public health messaging and raising awareness of clinicians for timely treatment and diagnosis. The present study investigated the accuracy of support vector machine, artificial neural-network, and random-forest time series models in influenza like illness (ILI) modeling and outbreaks detection. The models were applied to a data set of weekly ILI frequencies in Iran. The root mean square errors (RMSE), mean absolute errors (MAE), and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) statistics were employed as evaluation criteria.Entities:
Keywords: Influenza; Neural network; Outbreak; Public health surveillance; Random Forest; Support vector machine
Year: 2019 PMID: 31234938 PMCID: PMC6591835 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-019-4393-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Fig. 1a Time series plot for observed ILI frequency over the study period of time; Y axis represents the weekly ILI rate; X axis represents time; b ILI prediction values and residuals (c) obtained using random forest time series (RFST), support vector machine (SVM) and artificial neural network (ANN) models along with the observed values over the testing set
The statistical parameters of monthly ILI data set
| Parameter | Entire data | Training set | Test set |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 (first week)–2015 (52th week) | 2010 (first week)–2016 (25th week) | 2016 (26th week)-2018 (6th week) | |
| Mean | 24.39 | 25.35 | 20.56 |
| Minimum | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Maximum | 930.00 | 930.00 | 128.00 |
| Standard deviation | 68.29 | 74.50 | 33.78 |
| Skewness | 8.05 | 7.69 | 1.88 |
| kurtosis | 87.58 | 76.57 | 2.35 |
(a) The RMSE, MAE and ICC statistics of the used methods for prediction of ILI; (b) the performance criteria of the used methods for prediction of ILI outbreaks
| (a) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Kernel | Criterion | |||
| RMSE | MAE | ICC | |||
| RFTS | – | Train | 25.3 | 6.43 | 0.92 |
| Test | 22.78 | 14.99 | 0.88 | ||
| SVM | RBF | Train | 58.71 | 14.3 | 0.58 |
| Test | 28.19 | 22.36 | 0.53 | ||
| Polynomial | Train | 55.20 | 15.00 | 0.53 | |
| Test | 239.00 | 91.20 | 0.09 | ||
| Linear | Train | 53.60 | 13.00 | 0.53 | |
| Test | 30.10 | 18.60 | 0.47 | ||
| Sigmoid | Train | 63.90 | 17.30 | 0.43 | |
| Test | 30.80 | 20.00 | 0.24 | ||
| ANN | – | Train | 37.50 | 11.94 | 0.84 |
| Test | 26.58 | 13.21 | 0.82 | ||
| ARIMA | – | Train | 47.01 | 17.92 | 0.64 |
| Test | 34.90 | 28.16 | 0.03 | ||
aPositive predictive value
bNegative predictive value