Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

The methodological flowchart of the study.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Bivariate analysis between ever-married women’s nutritional outcomes, socioeconomic, health, and demographic characteristics from BDHS 2017–18.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Specifications of SML algorithms.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Performance of different regression algorithms in BMI prediction using 10-fold cross-validation.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Performance evaluation of different classification algorithms in predicting nutritional status using 10-fold cross-validation.

Here, LTR = Logistic regression; LLTR = LASSO logistic regression; DT = Decision tree; RF = Random forest; CT = Conditional inference tree; ADB = Adaptive boosting; XGB = eXtreme Gradient Boosting; KNN = K- nearest neighbor; SVM = Support vector machine; NN = Neural network; NB = Naïve Bayes.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Performance evaluation of different classification algorithms in predicting nutritional status based on Asian cutoff using 10-fold cross-validation.

Here, LTR = Logistic regression; LLTR = LASSO logistic regression; DT = Decision tree; RF = Random forest; CT = Conditional inference tree; ADB = Adaptive boosting; XGB = eXtreme Gradient Boosting; KNN = K- nearest neighbor; SVM = Support vector machine; NN = Neural network; NB = Naïve Bayes.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 4.

Feature importance ranking from the SML algorithms.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 4.

Conditional inference tree for BMI prediction using 10-fold cross-validation.

Each terminal node of this algorithm provides the average predicted value, the number of observations used, and the sum of squared error. NE, PE, SE, and HE represent no education, primary education, secondary education, and higher degree (such as college), respectively.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Conditional inference decision tree for underweight using 10-fold cross-validation.

Each terminal node of this algorithm provides the underweight status (Yes or No), the number of observations used, and the classification error.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Conditional inference decision tree for overweight using 10-fold cross-validation.

The categories of the education variable are the same as those of partner’s education. Each terminal node of this algorithm provides the overweight status (Yes or No), the number of observations used, and the classification error.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Conditional inference decision tree for obesity using 10-fold cross-validation.

On the partner’s employment variable, BC, WC, and UNEMP respectively represent blue-collar job, white-collar-job, and unemployed. Each terminal node of this algorithm provides the obesity status (Yes or No), the number of observations used, and the classification error.

More »

Fig 7 Expand