IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0213829.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Machine learning performance in a microbial molecular autopsy context: A cross-sectional postmortem human population study

Author

Listed:
  • Yu Zhang
  • Jennifer L Pechal
  • Carl J Schmidt
  • Heather R Jordan
  • Wesley W Wang
  • M Eric Benbow
  • Sing-Hoi Sze
  • Aaron M Tarone

Abstract

Background: The postmortem microbiome can provide valuable information to a death investigation and to the human health of the once living. Microbiome sequencing produces, in general, large multi-dimensional datasets that can be difficult to analyze and interpret. Machine learning methods can be useful in overcoming this analytical challenge. However, different methods employ distinct strategies to handle complex datasets. It is unclear whether one method is more appropriate than others for modeling postmortem microbiomes and their ability to predict attributes of interest in death investigations, which require understanding of how the microbial communities change after death and may represent those of the once living host. Methods and findings: Postmortem microbiomes were collected by swabbing five anatomical areas during routine death investigation, sequenced and analyzed from 188 death cases. Three machine learning methods (boosted algorithms, random forests, and neural networks) were compared with respect to their abilities to predict case attributes: postmortem interval (PMI), location of death, and manner of death. Accuracy depended on the method used, the numbers of anatomical areas analyzed, and the predicted attribute of death. Conclusions: All algorithms performed well but with distinct features to their performance. Xgboost often produced the most accurate predictions but may also be more prone to overfitting. Random forest was the most stable across predictions that included more anatomic areas. Analysis of postmortem microbiota from more than three anatomic areas appears to yield limited returns on accuracy, with the eyes and rectum providing the most useful information correlating with circumstances of death in most cases for this dataset.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu Zhang & Jennifer L Pechal & Carl J Schmidt & Heather R Jordan & Wesley W Wang & M Eric Benbow & Sing-Hoi Sze & Aaron M Tarone, 2019. "Machine learning performance in a microbial molecular autopsy context: A cross-sectional postmortem human population study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0213829
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213829
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213829
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213829&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0213829?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0213829. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.