Predicting stunting in Rwanda using artificial neural networks: a demographic health survey 2020 analysis

Similien Ndagijimana; Ignace Kabano; Emmanuel Masabo; Jean Marie Ntaganda

doi:10.12688/f1000research.141458.1

Home Browse Predicting stunting in Rwanda using artificial neural networks: a...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

Predicting stunting in Rwanda using artificial neural networks: a demographic health survey 2020 analysis

[version 1; peer review: 3 approved with reservations]

Similien Ndagijimana ¹, Ignace Kabano^1,2, Emmanuel Masabo^1,3, Jean Marie Ntaganda²

PUBLISHED 20 Feb 2024

Author details Author details

¹ African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Kigali, Rwanda
² College of Business and Economics, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Kigali, Rwanda
³ College of science and Technology, University f Rwanda, Kigali, Kigali, Rwanda

Similien Ndagijimana
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Ignace Kabano
Roles: Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Emmanuel Masabo
Roles: Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Jean Marie Ntaganda
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning gateway.

Abstract

Background

Stunting is a serious public health concern in Rwanda, affecting around 33.3% of children under the age of five in 2020. Several examples of research have employed machine learning algorithms to predict stunting in Rwanda; however, no study used artificial neural networks (ANNs), despite their strong capacity to predict stunting. The purpose of this study was to predict stunting in Rwanda using ANNs and the most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data from 2020.

Methods

We used a multilayer perceptron (MLP) architecture to train and test the ANN model on a subset of the DHS dataset. The input variables for the model included child, parental and socio-demographic’s characteristics. The output variable was a binary indicator of stunting status (stunted vs. not stunted).

Results

An overall accuracy of 72.0% on the test set was observed, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.84, indicating the model’s good performance. Several factors appear as important contributors to the probability of stunting among the negative value aspects. First and foremost, the mother’s height is important, as a lower height suggests an increased risk of stunting in children. Positive value characteristics, on the other hand, emphasie elements that reduce the likelihood of stunting. The timing of the initiation of breastfeeding stands out as a crucial factor, showing that early breastfeeding initiation has been linked with a decreased risk of stunting.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that ANNs can be a useful tool for predicting stunting in Rwanda and identifying the most important associated factors for stunting. These insights can inform targeted interventions to reduce the burden of stunting in Rwanda and other low- and middle-income countries.

Keywords

Feature importance, Artificial Neural Networks, Stunting, Children, Rwanda.

Corresponding author: Similien Ndagijimana

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: We declare that this study was funded by the African Centre of Excellence in Data Science at the University of Rwanda, as well as World Bank finance University of Rwanda, as well as World Bank finance (ID: ESC 91).
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2024 Ndagijimana S et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Ndagijimana S, Kabano I, Masabo E and Ntaganda JM. Predicting stunting in Rwanda using artificial neural networks: a demographic health survey 2020 analysis [version 1; peer review: 3 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2024, 13:128 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.141458.1) First published: 20 Feb 2024, 13:128 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.141458.1) Latest published: 20 Jan 2025, 13:128 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.141458.2)

Introduction

Stunting remains a significant public health issue worldwide, particularly in low-and middle-income countries. According to the latest estimates by the World Health Organisation (WHO), in 2020, around 149.2 million children under the age of five years (about 22% of all children in this age group) were affected by stunting globally, with the highest burden in low and middle-income countries.¹ The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the situation, since disruptions in food systems and health services are likely leading to an increase in stunting rates.² Therefore, stunting is still a serious public health problem across the world, particularly in Africa.² In 2020, about 58 million children under the age of five were stunted in Africa, accounting for nearly 40% of all stunted children worldwide. The prevalence of stunting in these EAC countries highlights the importance of focused interventions to address the underlying causes of stunting, which include poverty, poor nutrition, and a lack of access to healthcare and sanitary services.³

Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) are a type of machine learning (ML) technique that has gained prominence in recent years due to its ability to learn and generalise from data, making them ideal for predictive modelling applications.⁴ ANNs are a kind of deep learning, which is a technique that consists of training models with numerous layers of connected nodes to replicate human brain function.⁴ ANNs stand out in significance when contrasted with other ML algorithms for a multitude of compelling reasons. In many circumstances, ANNs can simulate complicated, non-linear interactions between input and output variables, allowing for accurate predictions.⁵ Linear models, such as linear regression, have limitations in capturing nonlinear correlations, but more complex models, such as decision trees or random forests, may overfit the data or be computationally costly, however, ANNs perform better.⁶ ANNs are usually resistant to noisy or incomplete data, making them useful in real-world situations where data is frequently poor.⁶ ANNs can automatically extract significant features from data, removing the need for manual feature engineering. This can save time and effort while modelling, especially with high-dimensional data.⁷ ANNs are suited for big data applications because they can be scaled to accommodate massive datasets, hence, it is critical to apply them to Rwanda Demographic Health Survey (RDHS).⁷ The RDHS is nationally representative research that collects data on a number of health indicators, including stunting, through house interviews.⁸

They can also be parallelised over many processors, increasing computing efficiency.⁹ ANNs may be used for transfer learning, which involves fine-tuning a pre-trained model for a new task with little data. This is especially important when data is scarce or expensive to collect.⁹ Using an ANN to predict stunting offers various advantages, including increased accuracy and the capacity to identify significant predictors of stunting. ANNs can analyse vast volumes of data and detect patterns that typical statistical approaches may miss, allowing for more accurate stunting predictions. Furthermore, ANNs can identify major predictors of stunting, such as poverty, low maternal education, and a lack of access to sanitary facilities, allowing for focused interventions to address the core causes of stunting.¹⁰ A few studies have been conducted in Rwanda using other machine learning technics like logistic regression, Supportive Vector Machine (SVM), Naive Bayes Random Forest (RF), XGBoost gradient model.¹¹

However, based on the existing knowledge there has been few researches in Rwanda that attempted to utilise ML to predict stunting like the study conducted by Similien et al.¹¹ ANNs have proven to be highly effective in predicting illnesses. However, Similien’s publication did not delve into the utilisation of ANNs for this purpose, despite their demonstrated effectiveness in prediction. Recognising this gap, a supplementary study was essential to explore the application of ANNs in predicting stunting in children, using data from the 2020 RDHS. Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication.¹¹ The remaining party of this study is organised as follow: Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion and recommendation.

Methods

DHS is a large-scale household survey program that is carried out in low- and middle-income nations. DHS surveys are meant to collect high-quality data on health, demographic, and nutrition indicators to help policymakers and program administrators make better decisions. The surveys are normally conducted every five years and give information on a variety of areas including fertility, mother and child health, family planning, HIV/AIDS, nutrition, and gender-based violence.¹² The secondary data from the 2019-2020 RDHS were analysed in this study. The RDHS is a five-year quantitative, cross-sectional study-based national survey. The RDHS used a two-phase stratified sampling approach. In the first step, 500 clusters were chosen from a pool of 112 urban enumeration areas and 388 rural enumeration areas. In the second stage, homes were systematically sampled, involving the selection of a random subsample of 26 households within each cluster, resulting in a total of 13,000 surveyed households. This subsample specifically included 3,814 children under the age of five, from whom height and weight measurements were collected.¹³

Quantitative variables

Explanatory variables

The explanatory factors for stunting that were associated with the characteristics of mothers, households, and children are summarised below (Table 1). The selection of variables from the DHS was guided by UNICEF conceptual framework children nutrition and tailored to the specific context of Rwanda.¹⁴

Table 1. Explanatory factors are assessed and documented for use in the analysis.

Variables	Description	Categories
Variables related to a child’s characteristics
Baby’s age	Age of the child in months	0: <6, 1: 6-11, 2: 12-23, 3: 24-35, 4: 36-47, 5: 48-59
Sex	Sex of the child	0: female, 1: male
Size of a child	Size of the child at birth	0: large, 1: average, 2: small
Birthweight	The weight of the child at birth	0: ≥2.5 kg, 1: <2.5 kg
Breastfeeding start	Time when the child starts breastfeeding	0: within the first hour, 1: 1-24 hours, 1-2: 30 days
Presence of diarrhoea	The child had diarrhoea in the last 2 weeks	0: No, 1: Yes
Variables related to the child’s mother
Maternal age	Age of the mother	0: less than 18 years, 1: Between 19-35 years, 2: greater than 35 years
Maternal education	Education level of the mother	0: no education, 1: primary, 2: secondary or higher
Maternal anaemia	Anaemia status the of mother	0: not anaemic, 1: anaemic
Marital status	Mother’s marital status	0: single, 1: married, 2: separated
Maternal height	Respondent’s height in centimetres	0: <160 cm, 1: ≥160 cm
Antenatal	Number of antenatal visits during pregnancy	0: no antenatal care, 1: 1-4 antenatal care visits, 2: more than 5 antenatal care visits
Variables related to households
Residence	Type of place of residence of the child	0: rural, 1: urban
Source of drinking water	Source of drinking water in the household	0: unimproved, 1: improved
Toilet facilities	Type of toilet facilities in the household	0: unimproved, 1: improved
Place of delivery	Distribution of live births by place of delivery	0: other, 1: delivery at home, 2: delivery at health facility
Province	Region	0: Kigali, 1: south, 2: east, 3: west, 4: north
Reading	Frequency of reading newspapers or magasines	0: ever, 1: reading
Altitude	Cluster altitude in meters	0: ≤2000 m, 1: >2000 m

Outcome variable

The outcome variable in this study was stunting status, which was classified according to WHO criteria. The nutritional status of children was separated into two categories based on height for age z-scores, as follows: stunted if standard deviation $SD < - 2$ was less than the median, and not stunted otherwise.¹³

Data preprocessing

Data preprocessing is the activity of preparing (cleaning and arranging) raw data so that it is understandable and useable for analysis. It consists of various stages, including data cleansing, data integration, data transformation, and data reduction.¹⁵ In this study, data cleaning was characterised as the procedure for addressing missing or incomplete data within the dataset. The missing values were addressed through imputation using the K Nearest Neighbours (KNN) imputer, which, when contrasted with the Euclidean distance, might result in a reduction of data similarity.¹⁶ Data transformation here used to describe the process of altering the format or structure of data to make it suitable for analysis,¹⁵ where the researcher encoded categorical data with the map function before converting it to dummy (0 and 1) values with pandas (pd). Obtain dummies that treated variable categories individually, then use the Minimax scaler to normalise the numerical data, which ranges all data values between 0 and 1, code was generated in Python using the popular ML library scikit-learn. Moreover, the Synthetic Minority Over-Sampling Technique (SMOTE) was employed to tackle the class imbalance within the target variable. This technique involves oversampling the minority class by generating synthetic instances along the line segments that connect any or all of the k nearest neighbours within the minority class.¹⁷ The software used during the data preprocessing and analysis was the python Google Collab.¹⁸

Training dataset

A dataset is divided into three subsets: a training set, a validation set, and a test set. The training set is used to train the model, the validation set is used to fine-tune the model’s hyperparameters and avoid overfitting, and the test set is used to assess the model’s final performance on new data. Each subset’s size is determined by the amount of the dataset and the model’s complexity. The dataset, consisting of 3814 observations, was divided into 80% for training (3051 instances) and 20% for testing and validation (763 instances).

Artificial neural networks model

The ANN was built using 23 inputs to predict stunting in Rwanda. After initialising the neural network, the model employed neurons as features in the input layer and two in the hidden layer. Two hidden layers were used in the ANN, a common choice for optimising performance, and they were tested individually to determine the ideal configuration for achieving the desired results in this proposed model. Because the goal of this study is to identify stunted newborns using training data, the rectifier activation function in the hidden layers and the sigmoid activation function in the output layer are used to set a range (0, 1) of a linear function in ANN.¹⁹ 80% and 20% of the data have been used as training and testing data respectively for a model that runs 100 epochs. Each epoch is seen as having one forward and one backward propagation. Finally, the most effective stochastic gradient descent optimiser parameter “Adam” is employed. The batch size is set to 32, which implies there are 10 occurrences in each epoch at any given moment. The loss (binary- crossentropy) function is used to classify the losses. With ANN, the best outcome is offered after computing the loss.²⁰^,²¹

Model training and evaluation

To train the ANN model on the training set using the hyperparameters chosen. During the training phase, the model’s capacity to recognise complicated patterns in the data is constantly refined. We rigorously monitor two critical parameters throughout this training process: loss and accuracy. Loss measures how much our model’s predictions differ from the real values, whereas accuracy measures how frequently the model’s predictions match the actual outcomes. Early stopping is a strategy in which the model’s performance is evaluated on a distinct dataset called the validation set on a frequent basis during training. This collection is unique from the training data and is used to assess the model’s generalisation capabilities. Model evaluation, on the other hand, is used to assess the performance of the trained ANN model on the test set.

The primary metrics used for assessment were accuracy, precision, recall, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC). This metric quantifies the overall correctness of the model’s predictions by measuring the ratio of correctly predicted stunting to the total children. Precision assesses the accuracy of positive predictions of stunting made by the model. It is calculated as the ratio of true positive predictions to the sum of true positives and false positives. Recall, also known as sensitivity or true positive rate, evaluates the model’s ability to capture all relevant instances. It is calculated as the ratio of true positives to the sum of true positives and false negatives. The AUC-ROC provides a comprehensive evaluation of the model’s ability to discriminate between stunted and no stunted children. A higher AUC-ROC value indicates superior discrimination performance. The analyses were conducted using the TensorFlow and scikit-learn libraries in Python.²²

Features importance

Here are 10 steps that we used for feature selection as seen in Figure 1: Step 1 includes importing the dataset and picking the necessary columns for prediction. In this case, the dataset has 23 input features and the ‘stunting’ variable as the target variable. Step 2 the function LabelEncoder is used to encode categorical variables. LabelEncoder is a scikitlearn (RRID:SCR_002577) utility class that encodes category characteristics as numeric values; Step 3 entails separating the data into input (X) and target (Y) variables. The input characteristics are contained in the X variable, while the target variable is contained in the Y variable; Step 4 entails dividing the data into 80% for training (3051 instances) and 20% for testing and validation (763 instances). The ANN model is trained using the training set, and its performance is evaluated using the testing set; Step 5 using StandardScaler, standardise the input characteristics. The scikit-learn library’s StandardScaler utility class standardises features by eliminating the mean and scaling to unit variance. Step 6: Build an ANN model with two hidden layers and one output layer. The number of neurons in the input layer is equal to the 23 of input features; Step 7 specifically, in our stunting prediction model, we opted for the Adam optimiser and binary cross-entropy loss. The choice of the binary cross-entropy loss function is crucial for binary classification tasks, such as distinguishing between instances of stunting and non-stunting. This loss function quantifies the difference between the predicted and actual outcomes, providing a measure of how well the model is performing in terms of classification accuracy; in Step 8, the model is trained using a dataset comprising a 3814 number of observations. In this case, the training data used for model training involves a determined amount of information. The model is exposed to this dataset over a series of iterations known as epochs. In each epoch, the model refines its weights and biases based on the training data to improve its predictive capabilities. The choice of 100 epochs ensures that the model undergoes a sufficient number of iterations to converge and achieve optimal performance. Additionally, a batch size of 32 is employed, signifying that the model processes 32 instances of data in each epoch before updating its parameters. This batch-wise training approach helps in optimising computational efficiency and contribute to the model’s generalisation ability.

Figure 1. The 10 steps to calculate and print list of feature importance using ANN.

Step 9 to determine feature importance, the eli5 library’s permutation importance is used. Permutation importance was the model-independent strategy used after training an ANN to predict stunting. It measures the decline in model performance when each feature is randomly shuffled across instances to determine the relevance of particular characteristics. The decline in performance, as measured by measures like as accuracy or AUC-ROC, reflects the significance of a feature. Permutation is performed over numerous samples, and the procedure is iterated to ensure consistency. Features that cause a significant decline in performance are thought to be critical for the ANN’s prediction accuracy in stunting situations. This strategy assists in the identification and prioritisation of critical elements that influence the model’s predictions. For scikit-learn and Keras models, the eli5 module implements permutation importance.²¹ Step 10 includes printing the features’ importance. The features’ importance is printed in descending order of significance, along with their appropriate weights.

Results

This section shows the results from ANN model, Figure 2 shows an accuracy of 72%.

Figure 2. Model accuracy.

The ANN model built in this study showed good results in predicting stunting in Rwandan children. The model attained a 72% accuracy and a ROC of 0.84, indicating that it is a very useful tool for detecting children at risk of stunting as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. ROC curves of Artificial Neuron Network.

The feature importance analysis of an ANN model for predicting stunting in Rwanda was examined in this article. The model reveals the important elements related to stunting, giving light to both negative and positive value characteristics. The features of importance were computed and displayed using the ANN model as seen in Figure 4. Identifying these positive and negative value characteristics is pivotal for comprehending the intricate dynamics of stunting and devising targeted interventions to mitigate its prevalence.

Figure 4. Feature importance using ANN model.

Negative value aspects

Figure 4 shows the realm of stunting prediction, certain factors exhibit a negative correlation with the likelihood of a child experiencing stunting. These include the mother’s height, child’s size at birth, gender of the child, mother’s education, place of residence, reading newspapers, and the mother’s age. These aspects, when present, tend to indicate a reduced risk of stunting.

Positive value characteristics

There are characteristics associated with a positive correlation, suggesting an increased risk of stunting in children. These positive value features encompass the initiation of breastfeeding, the presence of mother’s anaemia, marital status, province of residence, occurrences of diarrhoea, altitude, birthweight, and the age of the baby as shown in Figure 4.

Discussion

The ANN model’s results show considerable promise. The model displays its capacity to correctly categorise cases of stunting and non-stunting within the dataset with a significantly high degree of precision, with an accuracy of 72%. This demonstrates the model’s ability to detect critical patterns and variables associated with stunting in Rwandan children as also shown by Uddin et al.²³ This paper also show that ANN is very powerful compared to other models.²⁴ Furthermore, the model’s ROC score of 0.84 demonstrates its excellent discriminative capabilities. A higher ROC score indicates better distinction between the stunted and non-stunted child. The algorithm excels at reliably rating stunted children above non-stunted children, as indicated by an ROC score of 0.84, which is crucial in identifying individuals at high risk. These findings highlight the ANN model’s potential as a useful tool for predicting and mitigating stunting in Rwanda.²⁵ This study reveals that it is crucial to note that the ROC curve and AUC-ROC should be assessed in conjunction with other assessment measures like accuracy, precision, and recall to provide a thorough picture of the model’s performance and applicability for practical application in stunting prediction, however, this study used only the ROC.²⁵

Early identification of children at risk of stunting allows treatments to be targeted to those who need them the most, decreasing the burden of stunting on both the individual and society as a whole.²⁶ The use of ANN in stunting prediction offers the potential to improve early detection and intervention tactics. Policymakers and healthcare professionals may prioritise targeted treatments and deploy resources more efficiently if the primary factors leading to stunting are identified.²⁷ The study’s findings suggest that focusing on initiatives to enhance maternal nutrition, promote breastfeeding practices, and improve access to high-quality healthcare services could be of paramount importance in addressing the identified risk factors highlighted in the research as shown in Figure 4. Breastfeeding start appears as an important element, showing that early breastfeeding starting is connected with a decreased chance of stunting. These findings agree with the study conducted with Saberi-Karimian et al.²⁷ Understanding the factors that contribute to childhood stunting gives vital information to policymakers, healthcare professionals, and communities.²⁸

The same as the finding of this study suggested that efforts should be directed at improving maternal nutrition and health, supporting exclusive breastfeeding practices, and guaranteeing access to healthcare services that successfully manage maternal anaemia as well as the prevention and treatment of diarrhoea disorders, the mother’s height is important, as a lower height suggests an increased risk of stunting in children.²⁹ Additionally, customised treatments should be developed for certain provinces with a greater rate of stunting. The awareness among mothers and caregivers about the importance of child proper nutrition, breastfeeding practices, hygiene, and the significance of regular healthcare visits should be increased.³⁰ The research recommended that regular health checkups, growth monitoring, and testing to detect potential growth and developmental delays should be improved. Early measures, including nutritional supplements, caregiver counselling, and relevant healthcare interventions, can then be administered.³¹ The gender of the child is also associated with the outcome of the stunting of the child as seen in Figure 4. The mothers giving birth to boys should pay close attention to the nutrition of their babies, as different studies revealed boys are more stunted than girls.³²

Being at higher altitudes is associated with a high risk of stunting in children in Rwanda as revealed by the study.¹¹ It is crucial to emphasise that altitude is only one of several factors that contribute to stunting, and its influence varies depending on other contextual factors such as economic status, healthcare facilities, and dietary choices.³³ To alleviate stunting in high-altitude locations, a comprehensive approach is required, which includes increasing access to healthcare, nutrition, sanitation, and education, as well as addressing the underlying socioeconomic determinants of health,³⁴ this study also confirm the findings shown in the different studies. Finally, encourage collaboration among government agencies, healthcare providers, non-governmental organisations, and community-based organisations in order to execute comprehensive and multi-sectoral stunting elimination strategies. This partnership can ensure a comprehensive strategy to address the recognised stunting feature importance by combining the expertise and resources provided by different stakeholders.³⁴

However, while the model worked well in this study, it is possible that it may not generalise well to other populations or circumstances. Further study is needed to test the model’s generalisability and to uncover other factors that may improve its performance. Another limitation pertained to the discussion phase, primarily due to the scarcity of existing ANN literature focused on stunting prediction. Consequently, it was challenging to draw meaningful comparisons between this research and prior studies. The contribution of this research is the use of ANN analysis in stunting prediction in Rwanda results in improved identification of significant characteristics, real-time monitoring, targeted interventions, and useful policy decision-making assistance. These contributions increase our understanding of stunting, guide targeted interventions, and may eventually contribute to lowering stunting rates and enhancing children’s well-being in Rwanda.

Conclusions

The feature significance analysis of the ANN model in predicting stunting in Rwanda demonstrates the intricate interaction of numerous factors in affecting child growth and development. Positive value features stress the relevance of breastfeeding habits, mother health, and socioeconomic variables, whereas negative value features emphasise the importance of maternal qualities, education, and environmental factors. Rwanda may adopt targeted interventions and policies to minimise stunting prevalence and promote healthy growth and development for its children by addressing these major causes. In conclusion, the ANN model developed in this study provides a promising approach to predicting stunting in Rwanda. With further validation and refinement, it has the potential to significantly contribute to efforts aimed at reducing the stunting prevalence and improving child health outcomes in the country.

Data availability

Underlying data

In this study, we analysed datasets that are publicly available in the DHS program repository.

https://www.dhsprogram.com/data/dataset_admin/login_main.cfm. The request was address to DHS program after providing the purpose of the use of data then after we obtained authorisation from the DHS administration to use them. Data access is granted to individuals who create an account and submit a request. The DHS team reviews the request and, upon approval, provides access to the requested data.

Software availability

Source code available from: https://github.com/Similien1/ANN_stunting/blob/main/Copy_of_Artificial_Neuron_Network.ipynb

Archived source code: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8424559.¹⁸

Declaration: This manuscript shares the same data as the paper published https://jpmph.org/journal/view.php?doi=10.3961/jpmph.22.388 however the methodology used and result obtained are different.

Acknowledgments

This research could not have been completed without the contribution of different people who deserve acknowledgement: The African Centre of Excellence in Data Science at the University of Rwanda, World Bank financing (ID: ESC 91) project sponsored this research.

References

1. WHO: The unicef/who/wb joint child malnutrition estimates (jme) group released new data for 2021.2021.
2. Osendarp S, Akuoku JK, Black RE, et al.: The covid-19 crisis will exacerbate maternal and child undernutrition and child mortality in low-and middle-income countries. Nature Food. 2021; 2(7): 476–484. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
3. Union, A: Report on the implementation of activities on the roadmap of the au theme of the year for 2021 for the period february–june 2022.2022.
4. Goel A, Goel AK, Kumar A: The role of artifcial neural network and machine learning in utilizing spatial information. Spat. Inf. Res. 2022; 31: 275–285. Publisher Full Text
5. Pasini A: Artifcial neural networks for small dataset analysis. J. Thorac. Dis. 2015; 7(5): 953–960. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
6. Mata J: Interpretation of concrete dam behaviour with artifcial neural network and multiple linear regression models. Eng. Struct. 2011; 33(3): 903–910. Publisher Full Text
7. Sarker IH: Machine learning: Algorithms, real-world applications and research directions. SN Comput. Sci. 2021; 2(3): 160. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
8. Abiodun OI, Jantan A, Omolara AE, et al.: State-of-the-art in artificial neural network applications: A survey. Heliyon. 2018; 4(11): e00938. Publisher Full Text
9. Diahashree G: Transfer learning and the art of using pre-trained models in deep learning.2017.
10. Baashar Y, Alkawsi G, Mustafa A, et al.: Toward predicting student’s academic performance using artificial neural networks (anns). Appl. Sci. 2022; 12(3): 1289. Publisher Full Text
11. Ndagijimana S, Kabano IH, Masabo E, et al.: Prediction of stunting among under-5 children in Rwanda using machine learning techniques. J. Prev. Med. Public Health. 2023; 56(1): 41–49. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
12. Rwanda MHT: Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey 2019-20. 2021. Kigali: NISR; 2021.
13. Organisation, W.H et al.: Guideline: assessing and managing children at primary healthcare facilities to prevent overweight and obesity in the context of the double burden of malnutrition.2017.
14. UNICEF: Conceptual Framework Child Nutrition. New York, NY 10017, USA; 2021.
15. Al-Jabery K, Obafemi-Ajayi T, Olbricht G, et al.: Computational Learning Approaches to Data Analytics in Biomedical Applications. Academic Press; 2019.
16. Pujianto U, Wibawa AP, Akbar MI, et al.: K-nearest neighbour (k-nn) based missing data imputation. 2019 5th International Conference on Science in Information Technology (ICSITech). IEEE; 2019; pp. 83–88.
17. Mansourifar H, Shi W: Deep synthetic minority over-sampling technique. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.09788.2020.
18. NDAGIJIMANA S: Predicting Stunting in Rwanda Using Artificial Neural Networks: A Demographic Health Survey 2020 Analysis. Zenodo. 2023. Publisher Full Text
19. Vabalas A, Gowen E, Poliakoff E, et al.: Machine learning algorithm validation with a limited sample size. PLoS One. 2019; 14(11): 0224365. Publisher Full Text
20. Messner W: Hypothesis testing and machine learning: Interpreting variable effects in deep artificial neural networks using Cohen’s f2. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01407.2023.
21. Zhou S-N, Jv D-W, Meng X-F, et al.: Feasibility of machine learning-based modelling and prediction using multiple centers data to assess intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma outcomes. Ann. Med. 2023; 55(1): 215–223. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
22. Antunes A, Ferreira B, Marques N, et al.: Hyperparameter optimisation of a convolutional neural network model for pipe burst location in water distribution networks. J. Imaging. 2023; 9(3): 68. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
23. Uddin S, Khan A, Hossain ME, et al.: Comparing different supervised machine learning algorithms for disease prediction. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2019; 19(1): 1–16. Publisher Full Text
24. Stamenković LJ: Toxic/Hazardous Substances and Environmental Engineerin Application of ANN and SVM for prediction nutrients in rivers. J. Environ. Sci. Heal. Part A. 2021; 56(8): 867–873. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
25. Hajian-Tilaki K: Receiver operating characteristic (roc) curve analysis for medical diagnostic test evaluation. Caspian J. Intern. Med. 2013; 4(2): 627–635. PubMed Abstract
26. Hanieh S, Braat S, Simpson JA, et al.: The stunting tool for early prevention: Development and external validation of a novel tool to predict the risk of stunting in children at 3 years of age. BMJ Glob. Health. 2019; 4(6): 001801. Publisher Full Text
27. Saberi-Karimian M, Khorasanchi Z, Ghazizadeh H, et al.: Potential value and impact of data mining and machine learning in clinical diagnostics. Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 2021; 58(4): 275–296. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
28. Gracey M, King M: Indigenous health part 1: determinants and disease patterns. Lancet. 2009; 374(9683): 65–75. Publisher Full Text
29. Bryce J, Coitinho D, Darnton-Hill I, et al.: Maternal and child undernutrition: effective action at national level. Lancet. 2008; 371(9611): 510–526. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
30. Ganesan S, Jayaraj J, Geminiganesan S, et al.: A study on parental awareness of feeding practices in children in the age-group 12-24 months. J. Prev. Med. Hyg. 2021; 62(4): 909.
31. Liu Q, Long Q, Garner P: Growth monitoring and promotion (gmp) for children in low- and middle-income countries. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2017; 2017(1). Publisher Full Text
32. Rajabi M, Ebrahimi P, Aryankhesal A: Collaboration between the government and non-governmental organizations in providing health-care services: A systematic review of challenges. J. Educ. Health Promot. 2021; 10.
33. Shively G, Schmiess J: Altitude and early child growth in 47 countries. Popul. Environ. 2021; 43: 257–288. Publisher Full Text
34. Thurstans S, Opondo C, Seal A, et al.: Boys are more likely to be under-nourished than girls: a systematic review and meta-analysis of sex differences in undernutrition. BMJ Glob. Health. 2020; 5(12): 004030. Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 20 Feb 2024

Author details Author details

Ignace Kabano
Roles: Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Emmanuel Masabo
Roles: Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Jean Marie Ntaganda
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

We declare that this study was funded by the African Centre of Excellence in Data Science at the University of Rwanda, as well as World Bank finance University of Rwanda, as well as World Bank finance (ID: ESC 91).
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 20 Jan 2025, 13:128

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.141458.2

version 1

Published: 20 Feb 2024, 13:128

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.141458.1

© 2024 Ndagijimana S et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Ndagijimana S, Kabano I, Masabo E and Ntaganda JM. Predicting stunting in Rwanda using artificial neural networks: a demographic health survey 2020 analysis [version 1; peer review: 3 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2024, 13:128 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.141458.1)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 20 Feb 2024

Views

Reviewer Report 12 Jun 2024

Mediana Aryuni, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.154905.r274788

The paper needs some justifications for these concerns:

The reason why they only applied 1 Machine learning algorithm (ANN), while their previous research (11) applied 6 algorithms?
The reason why they chose kNN for

The paper needs some justifications for these concerns:

The reason why they only applied 1 Machine learning algorithm (ANN), while their previous research (11) applied 6 algorithms?
The reason why they chose kNN for data imputation and SMOTE for data balancing
Reconsider differentiating validation and testing data.
Feature importance is done before or after learning model development
Figure 1 is not systematic and clear
It will be interesting if they also compare the accuracy with and without SMOTE
They must explain why ANN doesn't perform better than Random forest, SVM, extreme gradient boosting, and gradient boosting in the discussion.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 02 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

02 Jan 2025

Author Response
1. The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher
... Continue reading
The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”

Choosing kNN for data imputation ensures that missing values are filled in a manner that maintains the natural relationships within the data, while SMOTE for data balancing addresses class imbalance, enhancing the model's ability to learn from and predict both stunted and non-stunted cases effectively. These preprocessing steps are crucial for building a robust and reliable ANN model for stunting prediction in Rwanda.

The validation and testing were differentiated in the methodology section

The feature importance was done after model development

I am sorry I did not get what did you mean by this question is it to refine the diagram? I keep it as it was however the title has been changed

I did however I get the same before balancing and after balancing

While ANNs have shown substantial effectiveness in various predictive tasks, including illness prediction, their performance may not always surpass that of other algorithms like Random Forest, SVM, XGBoost, and Gradient Boosting in specific contexts, such as stunting prediction. The reasons include the higher complexity and risk of overfitting, significant data requirements, sensitivity to data quality, need for extensive feature engineering, and the inherent strengths of other algorithms in handling structured data, computational efficiency, and ease of hyperparameter tuning. Thus, the choice of algorithm should be guided by the specific characteristics of the dataset and the problem at hand.
The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”

Choosing kNN for data imputation ensures that missing values are filled in a manner that maintains the natural relationships within the data, while SMOTE for data balancing addresses class imbalance, enhancing the model's ability to learn from and predict both stunted and non-stunted cases effectively. These preprocessing steps are crucial for building a robust and reliable ANN model for stunting prediction in Rwanda.

The validation and testing were differentiated in the methodology section

The feature importance was done after model development

I am sorry I did not get what did you mean by this question is it to refine the diagram? I keep it as it was however the title has been changed

I did however I get the same before balancing and after balancing

While ANNs have shown substantial effectiveness in various predictive tasks, including illness prediction, their performance may not always surpass that of other algorithms like Random Forest, SVM, XGBoost, and Gradient Boosting in specific contexts, such as stunting prediction. The reasons include the higher complexity and risk of overfitting, significant data requirements, sensitivity to data quality, need for extensive feature engineering, and the inherent strengths of other algorithms in handling structured data, computational efficiency, and ease of hyperparameter tuning. Thus, the choice of algorithm should be guided by the specific characteristics of the dataset and the problem at hand.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 02 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

02 Jan 2025

Author Response
1. The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher
... Continue reading
The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”

Choosing kNN for data imputation ensures that missing values are filled in a manner that maintains the natural relationships within the data, while SMOTE for data balancing addresses class imbalance, enhancing the model's ability to learn from and predict both stunted and non-stunted cases effectively. These preprocessing steps are crucial for building a robust and reliable ANN model for stunting prediction in Rwanda.

The validation and testing were differentiated in the methodology section

The feature importance was done after model development

I am sorry I did not get what did you mean by this question is it to refine the diagram? I keep it as it was however the title has been changed

I did however I get the same before balancing and after balancing

While ANNs have shown substantial effectiveness in various predictive tasks, including illness prediction, their performance may not always surpass that of other algorithms like Random Forest, SVM, XGBoost, and Gradient Boosting in specific contexts, such as stunting prediction. The reasons include the higher complexity and risk of overfitting, significant data requirements, sensitivity to data quality, need for extensive feature engineering, and the inherent strengths of other algorithms in handling structured data, computational efficiency, and ease of hyperparameter tuning. Thus, the choice of algorithm should be guided by the specific characteristics of the dataset and the problem at hand.
The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”

Choosing kNN for data imputation ensures that missing values are filled in a manner that maintains the natural relationships within the data, while SMOTE for data balancing addresses class imbalance, enhancing the model's ability to learn from and predict both stunted and non-stunted cases effectively. These preprocessing steps are crucial for building a robust and reliable ANN model for stunting prediction in Rwanda.

The validation and testing were differentiated in the methodology section

The feature importance was done after model development

I am sorry I did not get what did you mean by this question is it to refine the diagram? I keep it as it was however the title has been changed

I did however I get the same before balancing and after balancing

While ANNs have shown substantial effectiveness in various predictive tasks, including illness prediction, their performance may not always surpass that of other algorithms like Random Forest, SVM, XGBoost, and Gradient Boosting in specific contexts, such as stunting prediction. The reasons include the higher complexity and risk of overfitting, significant data requirements, sensitivity to data quality, need for extensive feature engineering, and the inherent strengths of other algorithms in handling structured data, computational efficiency, and ease of hyperparameter tuning. Thus, the choice of algorithm should be guided by the specific characteristics of the dataset and the problem at hand.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 22 May 2024

Mashfiqul Huq Chowdhury, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Santosh, Bangladesh

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.154905.r274789

This study employs a deep learning model to predict stunting status among children under the age of five in Rwanda. The findings are intriguing. However, several improvements are necessary. The comments are detailed below:
Title can be modified to: Predicting stunting status among under-5 children in Rwanda using neural network model: Evidence from 2020 Rwanda demographic and health survey
In the Abstract, the results section needs improvement. The authors should rewrite the following sentence: Several factors appear as important contributors to the probability of stunting among the negative value aspects.
Introduction section:
a) Discuss the consequences of stunting and the overall situation of stunting in Rwanda among under-5 children.
b) In the second paragraph, the author critically evaluates the linear regression and decision tree models. It is recommended that the author also discuss the logistic regression model.
c) This sentence is not relevant to me: "They can also be parallelised over many processors, increasing computing efficiency.9 ANNs may be used for transfer learning, which involves fine-tuning a pre-trained model for a new task with little data. This is especially important when data is scarce or expensive to collect."
d) Spelling mistake: Supportive Vector Machine
e) Give a reference to this sentence: ANNs have proven to be highly effective in predicting illnesses.
f) The authors need to provide a more detailed description of the motivation behind this study.
g) The literature review is very limited. I suggest adding more references to existing studies and relevant literature.
h) This sentence is not clear: "Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication.
Methods section:
a) This section can be split into the following sub-sections: Data Source and Sampling Design, Study Population, and Variables (Explanatory and Outcome Variables). The authors need to discuss the data file used from the DHS website, including information on any missing variables and whether they were discarded or handled in some other way.
b) In Table 1, the following changes are recommended: replace "Baby's age" with "Child's age," "Antenatal" with "Antenatal care visits," and "Reading" with "Media access." For variables such as source of drinking water, toilet facilities, and place of delivery, define the categories clearly in the variables sub-section. Specify the definitions for unimproved and improved statuses earlier in the text. Also, clarify which places are considered health facilities. Instead of using mother's height, the authors may consider the mother's BMI variable.
c) The variables "size of a child" and "birthweight" are essentially the same. Should both variables be included?
d) The authors need to clarify why the altitude variable is crucial for this analysis.
e) Authors can create a new subsection titled "Experimental Setup" to systematically outline the experimental procedures. This section should be written in a clear and organized manner to ensure ease of understanding for readers.
f) In the section discussing the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) model, it's important to specify the size of the hidden layer and provide justification for this choice, possibly citing relevant references. Additionally, authors should explain how they tuned the hyperparameters of the model. Including a reference for the Adam optimizer would also be beneficial. To improve clarity and prevent redundancy, it's recommended not to repeat the discussion of Scikit-learn, TensorFlow, and Python many times.
g) The authors should clarify the context in which they use both standardization methods, Minimax scaler and Standard scaler, in their paper. It's important to explain why each method is chosen and how they are applied to the data. This clarification will help readers understand the rationale behind using different scaling techniques and their impact on the results.
i) Use observations instead of instances.
j) Figure 1 title needs to be improved.
Results section:
a) In Figure 2, the x-axis and y-axis titles should be clearly labeled. The legends also need to be improved to indicate "Training Loss," "Test Loss," "Training Accuracy," and "Test Accuracy." Additionally, the main title of the figure should be rewritten for clarity.
b) Write a general comment based on Figures 2, 3, 4. Write in 2-3 paragraphs without sub-sections.
c) If feasible, conduct a comparison with a machine learning model like logistic regression. This comparative analysis will elucidate which type of model (ML or DL) is best suited for this type of dataset.
d) This sentence is not clear to me: "This study reveals that it is crucial to note that the ROC curve and AUC-ROC should be assessed in conjunction with other assessment measures like accuracy, precision, and recall to provide a thorough picture of the model’s performance and applicability for practical application in stunting prediction, however, this study used only the ROC".
Discussion section:
Authors can emphasize identifying similarities or consistency with other existing works.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Statistics and Data Science

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

20 Jan 2025

Author Response
For title
The title is modified as suggested
For abstract
I added some results, however, there is a limited number of words
The sentence has been rephrased like this: Factors appear ... Continue reading
For title
The title is modified as suggested
For abstract
I added some results, however, there is a limited number of words
The sentence has been rephrased like this: Factors appear to contribute to stunting among the negative value aspects.
Introduction section:

The discussion was added

As in the paper I published before and due to the limitation of the article I did not discuss this model here.

The sentence is removed

Supportive is changed into supporting

The reference is given

More details were given

The references are added

I paraphrased this sentence

Methods section:

The subsections have been added

The variables were changed

The variables "size of a child" and "birthweight " are not almost the same since one measures the height while the other measures the weight.

From the analysis made before we find that altitude contributes to stunting being at high altitude is an associated risk factor for stunting, even in this analysis, ANN shows altitude as the associated factor to stunting.

The section was not added due to the limited number of words however were explained in the methods

The comment was accepted and adjusted as suggested.

The clarification is given

The comments are considered the observation replaced the instances

The title is improved

Results section:
a) The title and legends have been added
b) I did it as suggested

c) the comparison made in the previous study

d) The sentence is paraphrased,
“This study highlights the importance of evaluating the ROC curve and AUC-ROC alongside other metrics such as accuracy, precision, and recall to gain a comprehensive understanding of the model's performance and its practical applicability in predicting stunting. However, it is important to note that this study only used the ROC for assessment.
Discussion section:
The emphases on similarities or consistency with other existing works were added
For title
The title is modified as suggested
For abstract
I added some results, however, there is a limited number of words
The sentence has been rephrased like this: Factors appear to contribute to stunting among the negative value aspects.
Introduction section:

The discussion was added

As in the paper I published before and due to the limitation of the article I did not discuss this model here.

The sentence is removed

Supportive is changed into supporting

The reference is given

More details were given

The references are added

I paraphrased this sentence

Methods section:

The subsections have been added

The variables were changed

The variables "size of a child" and "birthweight " are not almost the same since one measures the height while the other measures the weight.

From the analysis made before we find that altitude contributes to stunting being at high altitude is an associated risk factor for stunting, even in this analysis, ANN shows altitude as the associated factor to stunting.

The section was not added due to the limited number of words however were explained in the methods

The comment was accepted and adjusted as suggested.

The clarification is given

The comments are considered the observation replaced the instances

The title is improved

Results section:
a) The title and legends have been added
b) I did it as suggested

c) the comparison made in the previous study

d) The sentence is paraphrased,
“This study highlights the importance of evaluating the ROC curve and AUC-ROC alongside other metrics such as accuracy, precision, and recall to gain a comprehensive understanding of the model's performance and its practical applicability in predicting stunting. However, it is important to note that this study only used the ROC for assessment.
Discussion section:
The emphases on similarities or consistency with other existing works were added
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

20 Jan 2025

Author Response
For title
The title is modified as suggested
For abstract
I added some results, however, there is a limited number of words
The sentence has been rephrased like this: Factors appear ... Continue reading
For title
The title is modified as suggested
For abstract
I added some results, however, there is a limited number of words
The sentence has been rephrased like this: Factors appear to contribute to stunting among the negative value aspects.
Introduction section:

The discussion was added

As in the paper I published before and due to the limitation of the article I did not discuss this model here.

The sentence is removed

Supportive is changed into supporting

The reference is given

More details were given

The references are added

I paraphrased this sentence

Methods section:

The subsections have been added

The variables were changed

The variables "size of a child" and "birthweight " are not almost the same since one measures the height while the other measures the weight.

From the analysis made before we find that altitude contributes to stunting being at high altitude is an associated risk factor for stunting, even in this analysis, ANN shows altitude as the associated factor to stunting.

The section was not added due to the limited number of words however were explained in the methods

The comment was accepted and adjusted as suggested.

The clarification is given

The comments are considered the observation replaced the instances

The title is improved

Results section:
a) The title and legends have been added
b) I did it as suggested

c) the comparison made in the previous study

d) The sentence is paraphrased,
“This study highlights the importance of evaluating the ROC curve and AUC-ROC alongside other metrics such as accuracy, precision, and recall to gain a comprehensive understanding of the model's performance and its practical applicability in predicting stunting. However, it is important to note that this study only used the ROC for assessment.
Discussion section:
The emphases on similarities or consistency with other existing works were added
For title
The title is modified as suggested
For abstract
I added some results, however, there is a limited number of words
The sentence has been rephrased like this: Factors appear to contribute to stunting among the negative value aspects.
Introduction section:

The discussion was added

As in the paper I published before and due to the limitation of the article I did not discuss this model here.

The sentence is removed

Supportive is changed into supporting

The reference is given

More details were given

The references are added

I paraphrased this sentence

Methods section:

The subsections have been added

The variables were changed

The variables "size of a child" and "birthweight " are not almost the same since one measures the height while the other measures the weight.

From the analysis made before we find that altitude contributes to stunting being at high altitude is an associated risk factor for stunting, even in this analysis, ANN shows altitude as the associated factor to stunting.

The section was not added due to the limited number of words however were explained in the methods

The comment was accepted and adjusted as suggested.

The clarification is given

The comments are considered the observation replaced the instances

The title is improved

Results section:
a) The title and legends have been added
b) I did it as suggested

c) the comparison made in the previous study

d) The sentence is paraphrased,
“This study highlights the importance of evaluating the ROC curve and AUC-ROC alongside other metrics such as accuracy, precision, and recall to gain a comprehensive understanding of the model's performance and its practical applicability in predicting stunting. However, it is important to note that this study only used the ROC for assessment.
Discussion section:
The emphases on similarities or consistency with other existing works were added
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 17 May 2024

Billy Ogwel, Kenya Medical Research Institute- Center for Global Health Research (KEMRI-CGHR), Kisumu, Kenya

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.154905.r274786

This manuscript addresses a significant public health challenge and provides valuable insights. To further enhance its impact, the authors may consider the following suggestions:
Abstract:
-Add detail on the modelling approach in the methods section.
- Report 95% CI around the estimates
-Be very explicit on the targeted interventions in the conclusion of the abstract.
Introduction
-More recent estimates of stunting are available 148.1 million as at 2022 (https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/topics/joint-child-malnutrition-estimates-unicef-who-wb)
-The authors can add successful implementations of ANNs in the healthcare domain in the paragraph where they talk about the strengths of ANNs.
-The authors need to add the justification of their study why it is important to use ANNs to the same dataset that was used by authors in reference 11 in the same setting using SVM, NB, RF, LR, and XGBoost algorithms . Do they aim to achieve a higher predictive accuracy?
Methods
The authors say the data was partitioned into a training set, a validation set, and a test set. Yet talk only of a 80%:20% split. They could clarify this.
Results:
-The authors could refer to the TRIPOD checklist on reporting of diagnostic or prognostic prediction studies (Collins GS ,et.al., 2015 [Ref1]) . Specifically, they could : "Describe the flow of participants through the study, including the number of participants with and without the outcome and, if applicable, a summary of the follow-up time. A diagram may be helpful."
-They also need to report performance measures (with CIs) for the prediction model according to this guideline.

Discussion:
The authors could improve the discussion by comparing their results to those of other studies that have used DHS to predict stunting and particularly reference 11 that was done in the same setting using the same data. Did their ANN model improve performance as hypothesized in the background?
the authors could also discuss the potential clinical use of the model, highlighting where and when it can be used in the healthcare system

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

References

1. Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KG: Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement.BMC Med. 2015; 13: 1 PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Enteric Research, health informatics

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

20 Jan 2025

Author Response

For the abstract
The modelling approach has been added
- The percentage mentioned in the abstract is derived from the figure; therefore, the 95% confidence intervals have not been provided.
... Continue reading For the abstract
The modelling approach has been added
- The percentage mentioned in the abstract is derived from the figure; therefore, the 95% confidence intervals have not been provided.
- The target interventions have been explained in detail in the abstract, however, due to the limited number of words more have been given in the conclusion
For introduction
- The reference and the estimated number of stunted children were added in the introduction section
-The successful applications of ANN have been added
- The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”
For Methodology
-This explanation clarifies that the validation set is a subset of the training data, not the testing data, which helps to refine and tune the model before the final evaluation of the test set. Hence testing and validation share 20%
For results
-The proportion of Stunted children was given in the results section
For Discussion
-The incorporation of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) within various healthcare applications has been integrated into the discourse; nevertheless, due to the constraints of the paper's length, I have included some additional insights.
For the abstract
The modelling approach has been added
- The percentage mentioned in the abstract is derived from the figure; therefore, the 95% confidence intervals have not been provided.
- The target interventions have been explained in detail in the abstract, however, due to the limited number of words more have been given in the conclusion
For introduction
- The reference and the estimated number of stunted children were added in the introduction section
-The successful applications of ANN have been added
- The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”
For Methodology
-This explanation clarifies that the validation set is a subset of the training data, not the testing data, which helps to refine and tune the model before the final evaluation of the test set. Hence testing and validation share 20%
For results
-The proportion of Stunted children was given in the results section
For Discussion
-The incorporation of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) within various healthcare applications has been integrated into the discourse; nevertheless, due to the constraints of the paper's length, I have included some additional insights.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

20 Jan 2025

Author Response

For the abstract
The modelling approach has been added
- The percentage mentioned in the abstract is derived from the figure; therefore, the 95% confidence intervals have not been provided.
... Continue reading For the abstract
The modelling approach has been added
- The percentage mentioned in the abstract is derived from the figure; therefore, the 95% confidence intervals have not been provided.
- The target interventions have been explained in detail in the abstract, however, due to the limited number of words more have been given in the conclusion
For introduction
- The reference and the estimated number of stunted children were added in the introduction section
-The successful applications of ANN have been added
- The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”
For Methodology
-This explanation clarifies that the validation set is a subset of the training data, not the testing data, which helps to refine and tune the model before the final evaluation of the test set. Hence testing and validation share 20%
For results
-The proportion of Stunted children was given in the results section
For Discussion
-The incorporation of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) within various healthcare applications has been integrated into the discourse; nevertheless, due to the constraints of the paper's length, I have included some additional insights.
For the abstract
The modelling approach has been added
- The percentage mentioned in the abstract is derived from the figure; therefore, the 95% confidence intervals have not been provided.
- The target interventions have been explained in detail in the abstract, however, due to the limited number of words more have been given in the conclusion
For introduction
- The reference and the estimated number of stunted children were added in the introduction section
-The successful applications of ANN have been added
- The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”
For Methodology
-This explanation clarifies that the validation set is a subset of the training data, not the testing data, which helps to refine and tune the model before the final evaluation of the test set. Hence testing and validation share 20%
For results
-The proportion of Stunted children was given in the results section
For Discussion
-The incorporation of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) within various healthcare applications has been integrated into the discourse; nevertheless, due to the constraints of the paper's length, I have included some additional insights.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 20 Feb 2024

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2	3
Version 2 (revision) 20 Jan 25		read	read
Version 1 20 Feb 24	read	read	read

Billy Ogwel, Kenya Medical Research Institute- Center for Global Health Research (KEMRI-CGHR), Kisumu, Kenya
Mashfiqul Huq Chowdhury, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Santosh, Bangladesh
Mediana Aryuni, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

1 Views

19 Feb 2025 | for Version 2

Mediana Aryuni, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

1 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The author has already revised the input from the reviewer.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

3 Views

11 Feb 2025 | for Version 2

Mashfiqul Huq Chowdhury, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Santosh, Bangladesh

3 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

Comments
I have reviewed the revised paper along with the authors’ responses to previous comments.
While I am generally satisfied with their responses, I believe several areas still need improvement. My detailed comments are outlined below.
1. Check for grammatical errors.
2. Provide the full forms of EAC and ANN before introducing their abbreviations for the
fist time in the article.
3. Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) are the cornerstone of deep learning. The author describes ANN as a machine learning method. Since ANN and multilayer perceptron
refer to the same concept, I recommend revising the sentences related to ANN in the Abstract and Introduction sections to eliminate redundancy.
4. The last sentence of the Introduction needs correction. It starts with ‘The remaining party of this study is organized as follows....
5. The author should maintain consistency in using ‘k-nearest neighbors’ and ‘Minimax scaler’ throughout the article.
6. The authors have used secondary data from the 2019–2020 RDHS; however, the title mentions only the 2020 RDHS.
7. I assume the outcome variable is not properly defied. Stunting status is typically defied when the HAZ score is less than -2 SD. Please verify the definition of the HAZ score and revise the sentence accordingly.
8. The author mentions using Python Google Collab for data analysis. The correct phrasing should b e ’Python’ instead.
9. The authors divide the dataset into three subsets: a training set, a validation set, and a test set. However, in the last sentence, they state that the dataset, consisting of 3,814 observations, was divided into 80% for training and 20% for testing and validation (763 observations). They need to specify the exact sizes of the validation and test datasets.
10. The authors need to specify the sizes of the two hidden layers used in the ANN.
11. The authors should specify which deep learning package they used (e.g., PyTorch or TensorFlow) along with the version number of each packages and software. Additionally, including a reference for the Adam optimizer would be beneficial.
12. There is an inconsistency in the description of the neural network architecture. On page 6, the authors state, ‘After initializing the neural network, the model employed neurons as features in the input layer and two in the hidden layer.’ However, on page 10, they mention, ‘In this study, a multi-layer perceptron (MLP) uses one hidden layer.’ To avoid confusion, I recommend clarifying the number of hidden layers used in the model and ensuring consistency throughout the manuscript.
13. On page 6, I suggest changing the heading ’Artificial Neural Networks Model’ to ’Experimental Setup’ to better reflect the content of the section.
14. On page 6, the following sentence may not b e generally true: ‘Two hidden layers were used in the ANN, a common choice for optimizing performance.’ I recommend revising this sentence for better coherence and accuracy, as the optimal number of hidden layers depends on the specific problem and dataset.
15. The authors state, ‘Step 10 includes printing the features’ importance.’ However, it is unclear whether this conclusion is based on the training data or test data. Please
clarify this. I suggest presenting feature importance using the test data for a more reliable evaluation.
16. I suggest including the confusion matrix to better demonstrate the test accuracy and provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the model’s performance.
17. In Figure 4, the predictor variable labels on the Y-axis should b e written in their full form. For example, if ’mother height’ is used, I recommend changing it to ‘mother’s height’ for better readability and clarity.
18. The following sentence seems more appropriate for the Introduction rather than the Discussion section:
’The potential use of ANN is not only in stunting prediction but also in other healthcare services, such as an optimum ANN-based breast cancer diagnosis. ANNs have been used for various data classification and pattern recognition tasks in medical image processing and have shown promise as a classification tool for breast cancer. The use
of neural networks in image and signal processing grew substantially in the early 1980s.’ I recommend moving this content to the Introduction to provide better context for the
study.
19. The Conclusion section should be more concise while effectively conveying key findings and future research directions. I recommend streamlining the content to focus on the main contributions of the study and potential areas for further exploration.
.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Statistics and Data Science

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

8 Views

12 Jun 2024 | for Version 1

Mediana Aryuni, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

8 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

The paper needs some justifications for these concerns:

The reason why they only applied 1 Machine learning algorithm (ANN), while their previous research (11) applied 6 algorithms?
The reason why they chose kNN for data imputation and SMOTE for data balancing
Reconsider differentiating validation and testing data.
Feature importance is done before or after learning model development
Figure 1 is not systematic and clear
It will be interesting if they also compare the accuracy with and without SMOTE
They must explain why ANN doesn't perform better than Random forest, SVM, extreme gradient boosting, and gradient boosting in the discussion.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

02 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”
Choosing kNN for data imputation ensures that missing values are filled in a manner that maintains the natural relationships within the data, while SMOTE for data balancing addresses class imbalance, enhancing the model's ability to learn from and predict both stunted and non-stunted cases effectively. These preprocessing steps are crucial for building a robust and reliable ANN model for stunting prediction in Rwanda.
The validation and testing were differentiated in the methodology section
The feature importance was done after model development
I am sorry I did not get what did you mean by this question is it to refine the diagram? I keep it as it was however the title has been changed
I did however I get the same before balancing and after balancing

While ANNs have shown substantial effectiveness in various predictive tasks, including illness prediction, their performance may not always surpass that of other algorithms like Random Forest, SVM, XGBoost, and Gradient Boosting in specific contexts, such as stunting prediction. The reasons include the higher complexity and risk of overfitting, significant data requirements, sensitivity to data quality, need for extensive feature engineering, and the inherent strengths of other algorithms in handling structured data, computational efficiency, and ease of hyperparameter tuning. Thus, the choice of algorithm should be guided by the specific characteristics of the dataset and the problem at hand.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

7 Views

22 May 2024 | for Version 1

Mashfiqul Huq Chowdhury, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Santosh, Bangladesh

7 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Statistics and Data Science

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

20 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

For title
The title is modified as suggested
For abstract
I added some results, however, there is a limited number of words
The sentence has been rephrased like this: Factors appear to contribute to stunting among the negative value aspects.
Introduction section:

The discussion was added
As in the paper I published before and due to the limitation of the article I did not discuss this model here.
The sentence is removed
Supportive is changed into supporting
The reference is given
More details were given
The references are added
I paraphrased this sentence

Methods section:

The subsections have been added
The variables were changed
The variables "size of a child" and "birthweight " are not almost the same since one measures the height while the other measures the weight.
From the analysis made before we find that altitude contributes to stunting being at high altitude is an associated risk factor for stunting, even in this analysis, ANN shows altitude as the associated factor to stunting.
The section was not added due to the limited number of words however were explained in the methods
The comment was accepted and adjusted as suggested.
The clarification is given
The comments are considered the observation replaced the instances
The title is improved

Results section:
a) The title and legends have been added
b) I did it as suggested

c) the comparison made in the previous study

d) The sentence is paraphrased,
“This study highlights the importance of evaluating the ROC curve and AUC-ROC alongside other metrics such as accuracy, precision, and recall to gain a comprehensive understanding of the model's performance and its practical applicability in predicting stunting. However, it is important to note that this study only used the ROC for assessment.
Discussion section:
The emphases on similarities or consistency with other existing works were added

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

10 Views

17 May 2024 | for Version 1

Billy Ogwel, Kenya Medical Research Institute- Center for Global Health Research (KEMRI-CGHR), Kisumu, Kenya

10 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

References

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Enteric Research, health informatics

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

20 Jan 2025

Similien NDAGIJIMANA, African Centre of Excellence in Data Science, Kigali, Rwanda

For the abstract
The modelling approach has been added
- The percentage mentioned in the abstract is derived from the figure; therefore, the 95% confidence intervals have not been provided.
- The target interventions have been explained in detail in the abstract, however, due to the limited number of words more have been given in the conclusion
For introduction
- The reference and the estimated number of stunted children were added in the introduction section
-The successful applications of ANN have been added
- The reason was explained in the background of this paper “Given the crucial importance of addressing the root causes of stunting for effective treatments and policymaking, the researcher chose to conduct this study on the application of ANNs in the specific context of stunting in Rwanda, using the same dataset as the aforementioned publication”
For Methodology
-This explanation clarifies that the validation set is a subset of the training data, not the testing data, which helps to refine and tune the model before the final evaluation of the test set. Hence testing and validation share 20%
For results
-The proportion of Stunted children was given in the results section
For Discussion
-The incorporation of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) within various healthcare applications has been integrated into the discourse; nevertheless, due to the constraints of the paper's length, I have included some additional insights.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. WHO: The unicef/who/wb joint child malnutrition estimates (jme) group released new data for 2021.2021.

[2] 2. Osendarp S, Akuoku JK, Black RE, et al.: The covid-19 crisis will exacerbate maternal and child undernutrition and child mortality in low-and middle-income countries. Nature Food. 2021; 2(7): 476–484. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Union, A: Report on the implementation of activities on the roadmap of the au theme of the year for 2021 for the period february–june 2022.2022.

[4] 4. Goel A, Goel AK, Kumar A: The role of artifcial neural network and machine learning in utilizing spatial information. Spat. Inf. Res. 2022; 31: 275–285. Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Pasini A: Artifcial neural networks for small dataset analysis. J. Thorac. Dis. 2015; 7(5): 953–960. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[6] 6. Mata J: Interpretation of concrete dam behaviour with artifcial neural network and multiple linear regression models. Eng. Struct. 2011; 33(3): 903–910. Publisher Full Text

[7] 7. Sarker IH: Machine learning: Algorithms, real-world applications and research directions. SN Comput. Sci. 2021; 2(3): 160. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[8] 8. Abiodun OI, Jantan A, Omolara AE, et al.: State-of-the-art in artificial neural network applications: A survey. Heliyon. 2018; 4(11): e00938. Publisher Full Text

[9] 9. Diahashree G: Transfer learning and the art of using pre-trained models in deep learning.2017.

[10] 10. Baashar Y, Alkawsi G, Mustafa A, et al.: Toward predicting student’s academic performance using artificial neural networks (anns). Appl. Sci. 2022; 12(3): 1289. Publisher Full Text

[11] 11. Ndagijimana S, Kabano IH, Masabo E, et al.: Prediction of stunting among under-5 children in Rwanda using machine learning techniques. J. Prev. Med. Public Health. 2023; 56(1): 41–49. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[12] 12. Rwanda MHT: Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey 2019-20. 2021. Kigali: NISR; 2021.

[13] 13. Organisation, W.H et al.: Guideline: assessing and managing children at primary healthcare facilities to prevent overweight and obesity in the context of the double burden of malnutrition.2017.

[14] 14. UNICEF: Conceptual Framework Child Nutrition. New York, NY 10017, USA; 2021.

[15] 15. Al-Jabery K, Obafemi-Ajayi T, Olbricht G, et al.: Computational Learning Approaches to Data Analytics in Biomedical Applications. Academic Press; 2019.

[16] 16. Pujianto U, Wibawa AP, Akbar MI, et al.: K-nearest neighbour (k-nn) based missing data imputation. 2019 5th International Conference on Science in Information Technology (ICSITech). IEEE; 2019; pp. 83–88.

[17] 17. Mansourifar H, Shi W: Deep synthetic minority over-sampling technique. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.09788.2020.

[18] 18. NDAGIJIMANA S: Predicting Stunting in Rwanda Using Artificial Neural Networks: A Demographic Health Survey 2020 Analysis. Zenodo. 2023. Publisher Full Text

[19] 19. Vabalas A, Gowen E, Poliakoff E, et al.: Machine learning algorithm validation with a limited sample size. PLoS One. 2019; 14(11): 0224365. Publisher Full Text

[20] 20. Messner W: Hypothesis testing and machine learning: Interpreting variable effects in deep artificial neural networks using Cohen’s f2. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01407.2023.

[21] 21. Zhou S-N, Jv D-W, Meng X-F, et al.: Feasibility of machine learning-based modelling and prediction using multiple centers data to assess intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma outcomes. Ann. Med. 2023; 55(1): 215–223. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[22] 22. Antunes A, Ferreira B, Marques N, et al.: Hyperparameter optimisation of a convolutional neural network model for pipe burst location in water distribution networks. J. Imaging. 2023; 9(3): 68. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[23] 23. Uddin S, Khan A, Hossain ME, et al.: Comparing different supervised machine learning algorithms for disease prediction. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2019; 19(1): 1–16. Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Stamenković LJ: Toxic/Hazardous Substances and Environmental Engineerin Application of ANN and SVM for prediction nutrients in rivers. J. Environ. Sci. Heal. Part A. 2021; 56(8): 867–873. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[25] 25. Hajian-Tilaki K: Receiver operating characteristic (roc) curve analysis for medical diagnostic test evaluation. Caspian J. Intern. Med. 2013; 4(2): 627–635. PubMed Abstract

[26] 26. Hanieh S, Braat S, Simpson JA, et al.: The stunting tool for early prevention: Development and external validation of a novel tool to predict the risk of stunting in children at 3 years of age. BMJ Glob. Health. 2019; 4(6): 001801. Publisher Full Text

[27] 27. Saberi-Karimian M, Khorasanchi Z, Ghazizadeh H, et al.: Potential value and impact of data mining and machine learning in clinical diagnostics. Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 2021; 58(4): 275–296. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[28] 28. Gracey M, King M: Indigenous health part 1: determinants and disease patterns. Lancet. 2009; 374(9683): 65–75. Publisher Full Text

[29] 29. Bryce J, Coitinho D, Darnton-Hill I, et al.: Maternal and child undernutrition: effective action at national level. Lancet. 2008; 371(9611): 510–526. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[30] 30. Ganesan S, Jayaraj J, Geminiganesan S, et al.: A study on parental awareness of feeding practices in children in the age-group 12-24 months. J. Prev. Med. Hyg. 2021; 62(4): 909.

[31] 31. Liu Q, Long Q, Garner P: Growth monitoring and promotion (gmp) for children in low- and middle-income countries. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2017; 2017(1). Publisher Full Text

[32] 32. Rajabi M, Ebrahimi P, Aryankhesal A: Collaboration between the government and non-governmental organizations in providing health-care services: A systematic review of challenges. J. Educ. Health Promot. 2021; 10.

[33] 33. Shively G, Schmiess J: Altitude and early child growth in 47 countries. Popul. Environ. 2021; 43: 257–288. Publisher Full Text

[34] 34. Thurstans S, Opondo C, Seal A, et al.: Boys are more likely to be under-nourished than girls: a systematic review and meta-analysis of sex differences in undernutrition. BMJ Glob. Health. 2020; 5(12): 004030. Publisher Full Text

Predicting stunting in Rwanda using artificial neural networks: a demographic health survey 2020 analysis

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Quantitative variables

Table 1. Explanatory factors are assessed and documented for use in the analysis.

Data preprocessing

Training dataset

Artificial neural networks model

Model training and evaluation

Features importance

Figure 1. The 10 steps to calculate and print list of feature importance using ANN.

Results

Figure 2. Model accuracy.

Figure 3. ROC curves of Artificial Neuron Network.

Figure 4. Feature importance using ANN model.

Negative value aspects

Positive value characteristics

Discussion

Conclusions

Data availability

Underlying data

Software availability

Acknowledgments

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated