Frontiers in neurology · 2026
Development and comparison of machine learning models for predicting moderate-to-severe tinnitus in patients with hearing loss.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Chenguang, Ran Tao, Wang Yicong, Xiao Di, Wang Yuwen, Zhang Ying, Zhang Ying, Guo Bin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Analyze the psychological and clinical factors of clinically significant tinnitus (THI score ≥38) in patients with hearing loss, construct predictive models based on four machine learning (ML) algorithms, and compare the predictive performance of different models.
METHODS: Patients with hearing loss who visited the Department of Otolaryngology at Qinghai University between August 2024 and May 2025 were enrolled in this study. Clinical data were retrieved from the hospital's electronic medical record system. The study outcome was the occurrence of clinically significant tinnitus. Predictive variables were screened using univariate analysis, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression, and the Boruta algorithm. Four ML algorithms-logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and support vector machine (SVM)-were applied to construct and validate predictive models. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of each model in the validation set was compared using the DeLong test. Additionally, model performance metrics in the validation set were compared to identify the optimal model. Finally, the Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) algorithm was employed to interpret the best-performing model.
RESULTS: Nine key variables-age, hypertension, sleep disorder, anxiety, hearing loss severity, depression, noise exposure history, hearing side, and ototoxic drug use-were retained after LASSO and Boruta feature selection. Among the four ML models, the RF algorithm achieved the best predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.973 in the training set and 0.977 in the validation set, followed by XGBoost (AUC = 0.962 and 0.961, respectively). DeLong tests confirmed that RF significantly outperformed LR and SVM models (p < 0.001), while its difference from XGBoost was not significant. In the validation set, the RF model yielded the highest accuracy (0.923), sensitivity (0.929), specificity (0.914), precision (0.945), and F1-score (0.937). SHAP analysis indicated that hearing loss severity, age, and sleep disorder were the most influential predictors, suggesting that both auditory and non-auditory factors contribute substantially to the risk of clinically significant tinnitus.
CONCLUSION: The RF model showed the best performance in predicting clinically significant tinnitus, with hearing loss severity, age, and sleep disorder identified as major predictors. Integrating auditory and psychological factors can improve early risk identification in patients with hearing loss.
METHODS: Patients with hearing loss who visited the Department of Otolaryngology at Qinghai University between August 2024 and May 2025 were enrolled in this study. Clinical data were retrieved from the hospital's electronic medical record system. The study outcome was the occurrence of clinically significant tinnitus. Predictive variables were screened using univariate analysis, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression, and the Boruta algorithm. Four ML algorithms-logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and support vector machine (SVM)-were applied to construct and validate predictive models. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of each model in the validation set was compared using the DeLong test. Additionally, model performance metrics in the validation set were compared to identify the optimal model. Finally, the Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) algorithm was employed to interpret the best-performing model.
RESULTS: Nine key variables-age, hypertension, sleep disorder, anxiety, hearing loss severity, depression, noise exposure history, hearing side, and ototoxic drug use-were retained after LASSO and Boruta feature selection. Among the four ML models, the RF algorithm achieved the best predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.973 in the training set and 0.977 in the validation set, followed by XGBoost (AUC = 0.962 and 0.961, respectively). DeLong tests confirmed that RF significantly outperformed LR and SVM models (p < 0.001), while its difference from XGBoost was not significant. In the validation set, the RF model yielded the highest accuracy (0.923), sensitivity (0.929), specificity (0.914), precision (0.945), and F1-score (0.937). SHAP analysis indicated that hearing loss severity, age, and sleep disorder were the most influential predictors, suggesting that both auditory and non-auditory factors contribute substantially to the risk of clinically significant tinnitus.
CONCLUSION: The RF model showed the best performance in predicting clinically significant tinnitus, with hearing loss severity, age, and sleep disorder identified as major predictors. Integrating auditory and psychological factors can improve early risk identification in patients with hearing loss.