ABSTRACT
Objective Compare machine learning (ML) based predictive analytics methods to traditional logistic regression in classification of olfactory dysfunction in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS-OD), and identify predictors within a large multi-institutional cohort of refractory CRS patients.
Methods Adult CRS patients enrolled in a prospective, multi-institutional, observational cohort study were assessed for baseline CRS-OD using a smell identification test (SIT) or brief SIT (bSIT). Four different ML methods were compared to traditional logistic regression for classification of CRS normosmics versus CRS-OD.
Results Data were collected for 611 study participants who met inclusion criteria between April 2011 and July 2015. 34% of enrolled patients demonstrated olfactory loss on psychophysical testing. Differences between CRS normosmics and those with smell loss included objective disease measures (CT and endoscopy scores), age, sex, prior surgeries, socioeconomic status, steroid use, polyp presence, asthma, and aspirin sensitivity. Most ML methods performed favorably in terms of predictive ability. Top predictors include factors previously reported in the literature, as well as several socioeconomic factors.
Conclusion Olfactory dysfunction is a variable phenomenon in CRS patients. ML methods perform well compared to traditional logistic regression in classification of normosmia versus smell loss in CRS, and are able to include numerous risk factors into prediction models. Several actionable features were identified as risk factors for CRS-OD. These results suggest that ML methods may be useful for current understanding and future study of hyposmia secondary to sinonasal disease, the most common cause of persistent olfactory loss in the general population.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT01332136
Funding Statement
V.R.R., J.C.M., Z.M.S., T.L.S., and S.S.S. are supported by grants for this investigation from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD., USA [R01 DC005805 (T.L.S.), K23 DC014747 (V.R.R.), 1P01AI145818-01 (S.S.S.)].
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
COMIRB Protocol 19-2085
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Financial Disclosures: This study was supported in part by a grant from the Ludeman Family Center for Women’s Health Research at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (V.R.R.). V.R.R., J.C.M., Z.M.S., T.L.S., and S.S.S. are supported by grants for this investigation from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD., USA [R01 DC005805 (T.L.S. and Z.M.S.), K23 DC014747 (V.R.R.), 1P01AI145818-01 (S.S.S.)]. Public clinical trial registration (www.clinicaltrials.gov) ID# NCT01332136. Contents are the authors’ sole responsibility and do not necessarily represent official NIH views.
Conflicts of Interest: None related to this study
Additional validation analyses performed, and revision of Figure 1
Data Availability
No datasets were generated during the current study. Due to the nature of the primary research study, participants did not agree for their data to be shared publicly, so these supporting data are not available.
