The demand for the privacy-preserving survival analysis of medical data integrated from multiple institutions or countries has been increased. However, sharing the original medical data is difficult because of privacy concerns, and even if it could be achieved, we have to pay huge costs for cross-institutional or cross-border communications. To tackle these difficulties of privacy-preserving survival analysis on multiple parties, this study proposes a novel data collaboration Cox proportional hazards (DC-COX) model based on a data collaboration framework for horizontally and vertically partitioned data. By integrating dimensionality-reduced intermediate representations instead of the original data, DC-COX obtains a privacy-preserving survival analysis without iterative cross-institutional communications or huge computational costs. DC-COX enables each local party to obtain an approximation of the maximum likelihood model parameter, the corresponding statistic, such as the p-value, and survival curves for subgroups. Based on a bootstrap technique, we introduce a dimensionality reduction method to improve the efficiency of DC-COX. Numerical experiments demonstrate that DC-COX can compute a model parameter and the corresponding statistics with higher performance than the local party analysis. Particularly, DC-COX demonstrates outstanding performance in essential feature selection based on the p-value compared with the existing methods including the federated learning-based method.

Phenotyping is an automated technique that can be used to distinguish patients based on electronic health records. To improve the quality of medical care and advance type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) research, the demand for T2DM phenotyping has been increasing. Some existing phenotyping algorithms are not sufficiently accurate for screening or identifying clinical research subjects. We propose a practical phenotyping framework using both expert knowledge and a machine learning approach to develop 2 phenotyping algorithms: one is for screening; the other is for identifying research subjects. We employ expert knowledge as rules to exclude obvious control patients and machine learning to increase accuracy for complicated patients. We developed phenotyping algorithms on the basis of our framework and performed binary classification to determine whether a patient has T2DM. To facilitate development of practical phenotyping algorithms, this study introduces new evaluation metrics: area under the precision-sensitivity curve (AUPS) with a high sensitivity and AUPS with a high positive predictive value. The proposed phenotyping algorithms based on our framework show higher performance than baseline algorithms. Our proposed framework can be used to develop 2 types of phenotyping algorithms depending on the tuning approach: one for screening, the other for identifying research subjects. We develop a novel phenotyping framework that can be easily implemented on the basis of proper evaluation metrics, which are in accordance with users’ objectives. The phenotyping algorithms based on our framework are useful for extraction of T2DM patients in retrospective studies.

When asked for numerical estimations, people can respond by stating their estimates (e.g., writing down a number) or indicating a number on a scale. Although these methods are logically the same, such differences may affect the responses to the numerical estimations. In this study, we examined how differences in response format affected responses to numerical estimations using two behavioral experiments. We found that participants showed a round number bias (i.e., people answered estimates with round numbers) when simply stating a number and the distribution of responses tended to be less diverse. In contrast, this tendency was not observed when the participants responded using a scale. Participants provided more diverse estimates when they answered using a scale. Furthermore, we analyzed how this difference in response distribution was related to the wisdom of crowds (the aggregated judgment is as accurate as, or sometimes better than, the best individual judgment in the group) using computer simulations. The results indicated that round number bias affected the achievement of the wisdom of crowds. Particularly, when the group size was small, biased responses resulted in less effective achievement. Our findings suggest that using an appropriate scale is a low-cost method for eliminating round number bias and efficiently achieving the wisdom of crowds.