Skip to main content

Machine Learning Techniques for the Diagnosis of Disc Disorders: Comparative Analysis

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Soft Computing and Pattern Recognition (SoCPaR 2022) (SoCPaR 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 648))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 458 Accesses

Abstract

In recent years, machine learning (ML) techniques have emerged as leading solution providers in almost all real-world problems. Advancements in development of diagnostic procedures have been obtained while implementing these techniques in medical sciences. In this work, five ML techniques: Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), Gaussian Naïve Bayes (GNB), Logistic Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) have been evaluated on various parameters i.e., accuracy, precision, f1-score, recall, weighted average and macro-average. Experimentation is performed to determine the most precise and accurate forecasting method for the diagnosis of disc disorders. The dataset of 310 records with 12 attributes was considered for the experiment purpose and was divided into two ratios of 80:20 and 90:10 to train and test the different ML models. In addition, different type of model and training based hyperparameter (train-test ratio, depth, width, dropout) optimization was performed to determine the effect on training process of deep learning models and in optimizing the results. Results obtained shows that LR and MLP techniques performed better than other techniques in all instances and best results were obtained for all the methods in the train-test dataset split of 90:10.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Teraguchi, M., Yoshimura, N., et al.: Prevalence and distribution of intervertebral disc degeneration over the entire spine in a population-based cohort: the Wakayama Spine Study. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 22(1), 104-110 (January 2014)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Jouko, S., Erkintalo Minna, O., et al.: Recurrent Low Back Pain and Early Disc Degeneration in the Young. Spine 24(13), 1316 (July 1 1999)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Steenstra, I.A., Verbeek, J.H., Heymans, M.W., Bongers, P.M.: Prognostic factors for duration of sick leave in patients sick listed with acute low back pain: a systematic review of the literature. Occup Environ Med. 62(12), 851–60 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ravindra, V.M., Senglaub, S.S., Rattani, A., et al.: Degenerative lumbar spine disease: estimating global incidence and worldwide volume. Global Spine J. 8(8), 784–794 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568218770769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Taher, F., et al.: Lumbar degenerative disc disease: current and future concepts of diagnosis and management. Hindawi Publishing Corporation Advances in Orthopaedics, vol. 2012, Article ID 970752, p. 7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/970752

  6. Hosny, A., Parmar, C., Quackenbush, J., Schwartz, L.H., Aerts, H.J.: Artificial intelligence in radiology. Nat Rev Cancer. 18, 510–518 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Logistic regression: https://www.statisticssolutions.com/what-is-logistic-regression/. Accessed 25 June 2019

  8. Subasi, A.: Machine learning techniques, Practical Machine Learning for Data Analysis Using Python 2020, pp. 91-202. Academic Press. ISBN 9780128213797, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821379-7.00003-5

  9. Support vector machine: https://towardsdatascience.com/support-vector-machine-introduction-to-machine-learning-algorithms-934a444fca47. Accessed 10 July 2019

  10. Lipton, Z.C., Elkan, C., Naryanaswamy, B.: Optimal thresholding of classifiers to maximize F1 measure. In: Proceedings of the Joint European Conf. on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, pp. 225–239. Nancy, France (15–19 September 2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bansal, D., Chhikara, R., Khanna, K., Gupta, P.: Comparative analysis of various machine learning algorithms for detecting dementia. Procedia Computer Science 132, 1497-1502 (2018). ISSN 1877-0509, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.05.102

  12. Pai, V., et al.: Comparative analysis of Machine Learning algorithms for Intrusion Detection, Materials Science and Engineering, Volume 1013. In: International Conference on “Futuristic Trends in Mechanical Engineering" (ICOFTIME-2020). Bengaluru, India (24-25 April 2020)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bataineh, A.A.: A comparative analysis of nonlinear machine learning algorithms for breast cancer detection. Int. J. Machi. Learn. Comp. 9(3) (June 2019)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bhatt, et al.: A comparative analysis of classificaton methods for diagnosis of lower back pain. Orient. J. Comp. Sci. & Technol. 11(2), 135–139 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Biagetti, G., Crippa, P., Falaschetti, L., Tanoni, G., Turchetti, C.: A comparative study of machine learning algorithms for physiological signal classification. Procedia Computer Science 126, 1977-1984 (2018). ISSN 1877-0509, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.07.255

  16. Mahadevappa, P., Muzammal, S.M., Murugesan, R.K.: A Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Algorithms for Intrusion Detection in Edge-Enabled IoT Networks (2021). arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.01383

  17. Awan, F.M., Saleem, Y., Minerva, R., Crespi, N.: A comparative analysis of machine/deep learning models for parking space availability prediction. Sensors (Basel) 20(1), 322 (2020). Published 6 Jan 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20010322

  18. Ghosh, M., Mohsin, M., Raihan, M., Akter, L., Bairagi, A.K., et al.: A Comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms to predict liver disease. Intelligent Automation & Soft Computing 30(3), 917–928 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Raihan-Al-Masud, M., Mondal, M.R.H.: Data-driven diagnosis of spinal abnormalities using feature selection and machine learning algorithms. PLoS ONE 15(2), e0228422 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Nuredeen, A., Matoug, A., AL-Jebury, H., Akyol, K., Alsarrar, M.R.: Comparison supervised learning algorithms for spinal-column disease. Int. J. Sci. Res. (IJSR) 8(1), 312–315 (January 2019). https://www.ijsr.net/get_abstract.php?paper_id=ART20194133

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deepika Koundal .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Hussain, M., Koundal, D., Manhas, J. (2023). Machine Learning Techniques for the Diagnosis of Disc Disorders: Comparative Analysis. In: Abraham, A., Hanne, T., Gandhi, N., Manghirmalani Mishra, P., Bajaj, A., Siarry, P. (eds) Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Soft Computing and Pattern Recognition (SoCPaR 2022). SoCPaR 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 648. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27524-1_47

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics