Chien-Hua Huang

We aimed to develop and validate a machine learning model using impulse oscillometry system (IOS) profiles for accurately classifying patients into three assessment-based categories: no airflow obstruction, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Our research questions were as follows: (1) Can machine learning methods accurately classify obstructive disease states based solely on multidimensional IOS data? (2) Which IOS parameters and modeling algorithms provide the best discrimination? We used data for 480 patients (240 with COPD and 240 with asthma) and 84 healthy individuals for training. Physiological and IOS parameters were combined into six feature combinations. The classification algorithms tested were logistic regression, random forest, neural network, k-nearest neighbor, and support vector machine. The optimal feature combination for identifying individuals without pulmonary obstruction, with asthma, or with COPD included 15 IOS and physiological features. The neural network classifier achieved the highest accuracy (0.786). For discriminating between healthy and unhealthy individuals, two combinations of twenty-three features performed best in the neural network algorithm (accuracy of 0.929). When distinguishing COPD from asthma, the best combination included 15 features and the neural network algorithm achieved an accuracy of 0.854. This study provides compelling technical evidence and clinical justifications for advancing IOS data-driven models to aid in COPD and asthma management.

Fall-risk assessment studies generally focus on identifying characteristics that affect postural balance in a specific group of subjects. However, falls affect a multitude of individuals. Among the groups with the most recurrent fallers are the community-dwelling elderly and stroke survivors. Thus, this study focuses on identifying a set of features that can explain fall risk for these two groups of subjects. Sixty-five community dwelling elderly (forty-nine female, sixteen male) and thirty-five stroke-survivors (twenty-two male, thirteen male) participated in our study. With the use of an inertial sensor, some features are extracted from the acceleration data of a Timed Up and Go (TUG) test performed by both groups of individuals. A short-form berg balance scale (SFBBS) score and the TUG test score were used for labeling the data. With the use of a 100-fold cross-validation approach, Relief-F and Extra Trees Classifier algorithms were used to extract sets of the top 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 features. Random Forest classifiers were trained for each set of features. The best models were selected, and the repeated features for each group of subjects were analyzed and discussed. The results show that only the stand duration was an important feature for the prediction of fall risk across all clinical tests and both groups of individuals.

Falling is a common incident that affects the health of elder adults worldwide. Postural instability is one of the major contributors to this problem. In this study, we propose a supplementary method for measuring postural stability that reduces doctor intervention. We used simple clinical tests, including the timed-up and go test (TUG), short form berg balance scale (SFBBS), and short portable mental status questionnaire (SPMSQ) to measure different factors related to postural stability that have been found to increase the risk of falling. We attached an inertial sensor to the lower back of a group of elderly subjects while they performed the TUG test, providing us with a tri-axial acceleration signal, which we used to extract a set of features, including multi-scale entropy (MSE), permutation entropy (PE), and statistical features. Using the score for each clinical test, we classified our participants into fallers or non-fallers in order to (1) compare the features calculated from the inertial sensor data, and (2) compare the screening capabilities of the multifactor clinical test against each individual test. We use random forest to select features and classify subjects across all scenarios. The results show that the combination of MSE and statistic features overall provide the best classification results. Meanwhile, PE is not an important feature in any scenario in our study. In addition, a t-test shows that the multifactor test of TUG and BBS is a better classifier of subjects in this study.