Leveraging machine learning to characterize the role of socio-economic determinants on physical health and well-being among veterans

Social Drivers of Mental Health: A U.S. Study Using Machine Learning

INTRODUCTION

Social drivers of mental health can be compared on an aggregated level. This study employed a machine learning approach to identify and rank social drivers of mental health across census tracts in the U.S.

METHODS

Data for 38,379 census tracts in the U.S. were collected from multiple sources in 2021. Two measures of mental health problems-self-reported depression and self-assessed poor mental health-among adults and three domains of social drivers (behavioral, environmental, and social) were analyzed on the basis of the unit of census tracts using the Extreme Gradient Boosting machine learning approach in 2022. The leading social drivers were found in each domain in the main sample and in the subsamples divided on the basis of poverty and racial segregation.

RESULTS

The three domains combined explained more than 90% of the variance of both mental illness indicators. Self-reported depression and self-assessed poor mental health differed in major social drivers. The two outcome indicators had one overlapping correlate from the behavioral domain: smoking. Other than smoking, climate zone and racial composition were the leading correlates from the environmental and social domains, respectively. Census tract characteristics moderated the impacts of social drivers on mental health problems; the major social drivers differed by census tract poverty and racial segregation.

CONCLUSIONS

Population mental health is highly contextualized. Better interventions can be developed on the basis of census tract-level analyses of social drivers that characterize the upstream causes of mental health problems.

Social Determinants, Cardiovascular Disease, and Health Care Cost: A Nationwide Study in the United States Using Machine Learning

Background Existing studies on cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) often focus on individual-level behavioral risk factors, but research examining social determinants is limited. This study applies a novel machine learning approach to identify the key predictors of county-level care costs and prevalence of CVDs (including atrial fibrillation, acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and ischemic heart disease). Methods and Results We applied the extreme gradient boosting machine learning approach to a total of 3137 counties. Data are from the Interactive Atlas of Heart Disease and Stroke and a variety of national data sets. We found that although demographic composition (eg, percentages of Black people and older adults) and risk factors (eg, smoking and physical inactivity) are among the most important predictors for inpatient care costs and CVD prevalence, contextual factors such as social vulnerability and racial and ethnic segregation are particularly important for the total and outpatient care costs. Poverty and income inequality are the major contributors to the total care costs for counties that are in nonmetro areas or have high segregation or social vulnerability levels. Racial and ethnic segregation is particularly important in shaping the total care costs for counties with low poverty rates or social vulnerability level. Demographic composition, education, and social vulnerability are consistently important across different scenarios. Conclusions The findings highlight the differences in predictors for different types of CVD cost outcomes and the importance of social determinants. Interventions directed toward areas that have been economically and socially marginalized may aid in reducing the impact of CVDs.

Designing COVID-19 mortality predictions to advance clinical outcomes: Evidence from the Department of Veterans Affairs

Using administrative data on all Veterans who enter Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centres throughout the USA, this paper uses artificial intelligence (AI) to predict mortality rates for patients with COVID-19 between March and August 2020. First, using comprehensive data on over 10 000 Veterans’ medical history, demographics and lab results, we estimate five AI models. Our XGBoost model performs the best, producing an area under the receive operator characteristics curve (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curve of 0.87 and 0.41, respectively. We show how focusing on the performance of the AUROC alone can lead to unreliable models. Second, through a unique collaboration with the Washington D.C. VA medical centre, we develop a dashboard that incorporates these risk factors and the contributing sources of risk, which we deploy across local VA medical centres throughout the country. Our results provide a concrete example of how AI recommendations can be made explainable and practical for clinicians and their interactions with patients.

Ethical Applications of Artificial Intelligence: Evidence From Health Research on Veterans

Background

Despite widespread agreement that artificial intelligence (AI) offers significant benefits for individuals and society at large, there are also serious challenges to overcome with respect to its governance. Recent policymaking has focused on establishing principles for the trustworthy use of AI. Adhering to these principles is especially important for ensuring that the development and application of AI raises economic and social welfare, including among vulnerable groups and veterans.

Objective

We explore the newly developed principles around trustworthy AI and how they can be readily applied at scale to vulnerable groups that are potentially less likely to benefit from technological advances.

Methods

Using the US Department of Veterans Affairs as a case study, we explore the principles of trustworthy AI that are of particular interest for vulnerable groups and veterans.

Results

We focus on three principles: (1) designing, developing, acquiring, and using AI so that the benefits of its use significantly outweigh the risks and the risks are assessed and managed; (2) ensuring that the application of AI occurs in well-defined domains and is accurate, effective, and fit for the intended purposes; and (3) ensuring that the operations and outcomes of AI applications are sufficiently interpretable and understandable by all subject matter experts, users, and others.

Conclusions

These principles and applications apply more generally to vulnerable groups, and adherence to them can allow the VA and other organizations to continue modernizing their technology governance, leveraging the gains of AI while simultaneously managing its risks.