Risk groups in children under six months of age using self-organizing maps

A O C Schilithz1, P L Kale2, S G N Gama3

  • 1PEB/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Insights

This study identified distinct infant growth risk profiles in Rio de Janeiro. Infants in group 3 showed the worst health indicators, requiring urgent public health intervention.

Area of Science:

  • Pediatrics
  • Public Health
  • Data Science

Background:

  • Fetal and infant growth is irregular, especially in developing nations, influenced by living conditions and pregnancy complications.
  • Identifying distinct risk profiles is crucial for targeted interventions in early childhood development.
  • Rio de Janeiro provided the setting to examine growth patterns in a diverse urban population.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To identify distinct risk profiles for growth development among infants under six months.
  • To apply cluster analysis for grouping infants based on health and birth characteristics.
  • To inform public health policies for improved infant outcomes.

Main Methods:

  • Employed unsupervised learning, specifically self-organizing maps (SOM) and K-means clustering.
  • Analyzed data from 904 infants (496 girls, 508 boys) from 27 primary health care units.
  • Utilized maternal interviews and child health card reviews for data collection.

Main Results:

  • Four distinct infant groups emerged based on growth and health indicators.
  • Group 1: Cesarean births, multiparous mothers, high prematurity/low birthweight, high exclusive breastfeeding, low hospitalization.
  • Group 2: Best perinatal/infant health indicators.
  • Group 3: Worst perinatal/infant health indicators, requiring urgent intervention.
  • Group 4: Higher birthweight, low exclusive breastfeeding, higher hospitalization rates.

Conclusions:

  • Self-organizing maps effectively identified infant groups with shared characteristics.
  • Infants in group 3 present the highest risk, necessitating immediate public health attention and policy adjustments.
  • While groups were identified, no significant differences in postnatal weight adequacy were observed across all groups.