Neural Networks vs. Regression: A Comparative Analysis in Medical Data Processing

Background and Aim: The increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical research offered alternative methods for medical data processing. This study evaluated comparatively the predictive performance of feedforward neural networks (FFNN) regression versus classical statistical regression analysis in estimating the risk of post-COVID-19 type 2 diabetes based on metabolic factors. The primary objective was to assess the applicability, advantages, and limitations of these approaches when applied to relatively small medical datasets. Materials and Methods: We started with the analysis of a small dataset - 130 patient records with metabolic parameters [1]. The risk of post-COVID-19 type 2 diabetes (glycaemia at 4 and at 12 months post-COVID as function of metabolic parameters) was predicted using both linear regression and FFNN. The regression model followed standard statistical guidelines, while the FFNN required optimization of hyperparameters, including the number of layers, activation functions, learning rate, and optimization algorithms. We extended the study using simulated data to further compare logistic regression (a data set of 300 patients) with neural networks. Results: The classical regression models demonstrated stable performance with clear interpretability, offering well-defined coefficients and statistical significance measures. However, FFNN did not yield superior predictive accuracy, and its performance varied significantly depending on the choice of hyperparameters. The optimization process for NN required extensive trial and error, as no universal guidelines for parameter selection were applicable in this context. Discussion. Our findings highlight a real challenge in medical AI applications for data processing: when dealing with small datasets, neural networks do not necessarily outperform classical methods. Regression provided robust results with minimal computational effort, while FFNN required complex tuning without a clear performance advantage. The use of simulated data revealed that NN might be more effective in larger datasets with potential non-linear patterns, but limited interpretability. Conclusion: AI-based models are, indeed, recommended for data processing of large and/or unstructured complex medical data sets. However, as a conclusion of this study, regression models proved to be a more practical and reliable choice for small-scale medical predictions. Future work should explore hybrid models that combine interpretability with non-linear modeling capacity to optimize predictive accuracy in clinical settings.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2025-05-01
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Neural Networks vs. Regression: A Comparative Analysis in Medical Data Processing

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
article

Neural Networks vs. Regression: A Comparative Analysis in Medical Data Processing

article en

Abstract

Background and Aim: The increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical research offered alternative methods for medical data processing. This study evaluated comparatively the predictive performance of feedforward neural networks (FFNN) regression versus classical statistical regression analysis in estimating the risk of post-COVID-19 type 2 diabetes based on metabolic factors. The primary objective was to assess the applicability, advantages, and limitations of these approaches when applied to relatively small medical datasets. Materials and Methods: We started with the analysis of a small dataset - 130 patient records with metabolic parameters [1]. The risk of post-COVID-19 type 2 diabetes (glycaemia at 4 and at 12 months post-COVID as function of metabolic parameters) was predicted using both linear regression and FFNN. The regression model followed standard statistical guidelines, while the FFNN required optimization of hyperparameters, including the number of layers, activation functions, learning rate, and optimization algorithms. We extended the study using simulated data to further compare logistic regression (a data set of 300 patients) with neural networks. Results: The classical regression models demonstrated stable performance with clear interpretability, offering well-defined coefficients and statistical significance measures. However, FFNN did not yield superior predictive accuracy, and its performance varied significantly depending on the choice of hyperparameters. The optimization process for NN required extensive trial and error, as no universal guidelines for parameter selection were applicable in this context. Discussion. Our findings highlight a real challenge in medical AI applications for data processing: when dealing with small datasets, neural networks do not necessarily outperform classical methods. Regression provided robust results with minimal computational effort, while FFNN required complex tuning without a clear performance advantage. The use of simulated data revealed that NN might be more effective in larger datasets with potential non-linear patterns, but limited interpretability. Conclusion: AI-based models are, indeed, recommended for data processing of large and/or unstructured complex medical data sets. However, as a conclusion of this study, regression models proved to be a more practical and reliable choice for small-scale medical predictions. Future work should explore hybrid models that combine interpretability with non-linear modeling capacity to optimize predictive accuracy in clinical settings.

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Victor Babeș University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timișoara (RO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 41%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.