![\"\"](\"https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F5287922%2F1f4bfe363cc366d51d1dcb4586855eaf%2F_20200723191839.png?generation=1595524768888216&alt=media\")
In train dataset, the patient with ID00421637202311550012437 has different FVC at the same Week=70. Are the values wrong? Or it is allowed to measure the different FVC in the same week?\n
In train dataset, the patient with ID00421637202311550012437 has different FVC at the same Week=70. Are the values wrong? Or it is allowed to measure the different FVC in the same week?\n
This means that this patient had two FVC measurements in the same week.
", "rawMarkdown": "This means that this patient had two FVC measurements in the same week.", "votes": null }, { "id": "942500", "postDate": "07/23/2020 19:25:44", "content": "An analysis of the dataset will show that there can, in fact, be patients who have multiple FVC measurements within the same week. As Ahmed noted, this is simply one of those cases.
\n\nNote, as described in the competition details:
\n\n> Since this is real medical data, you will notice the relative timing of FVC measurements varies widely. The timing of the initial measurement relative to the CT scan and the duration to the forecasted time points may be different for each patient. This is considered part of the challenge of the competition. To avoid potential leakage in the timing of follow up visits, you are asked to predict every patient's FVC measurement for every possible week. Those weeks which are not in the final three visits are ignored in scoring.
\n\nThere are multiple courses of action you can take to mitigate this potential issue. A few ideas: average FVC values, drop later values, or simply pick the highest values.
\n\nHope this helps!
", "rawMarkdown": "An analysis of the dataset will show that there can, in fact, be patients who have multiple FVC measurements within the same week. As Ahmed noted, this is simply one of those cases. \n\nNote, as described in the competition details:\n\n> Since this is real medical data, you will notice the relative timing of FVC measurements varies widely. The timing of the initial measurement relative to the CT scan and the duration to the forecasted time points may be different for each patient. This is considered part of the challenge of the competition. To avoid potential leakage in the timing of follow up visits, you are asked to predict every patient's FVC measurement for every possible week. Those weeks which are not in the final three visits are ignored in scoring.\n\nThere are multiple courses of action you can take to mitigate this potential issue. A few ideas: average FVC values, drop later values, or simply pick the highest values. \n\nHope this helps!", "votes": null } ], "comments": [ { "id": 942369, "author_name": "ahmedhshahin", "author_url": "", "post_date": "07/23/2020 18:00:15", "content": "This means that this patient had two FVC measurements in the same week.
", "votes": null, "replies": [] }, { "id": 942500, "author_name": "roshanr11", "author_url": "", "post_date": "07/23/2020 19:25:44", "content": "An analysis of the dataset will show that there can, in fact, be patients who have multiple FVC measurements within the same week. As Ahmed noted, this is simply one of those cases.
\n\nNote, as described in the competition details:
\n\n> Since this is real medical data, you will notice the relative timing of FVC measurements varies widely. The timing of the initial measurement relative to the CT scan and the duration to the forecasted time points may be different for each patient. This is considered part of the challenge of the competition. To avoid potential leakage in the timing of follow up visits, you are asked to predict every patient's FVC measurement for every possible week. Those weeks which are not in the final three visits are ignored in scoring.
\n\nThere are multiple courses of action you can take to mitigate this potential issue. A few ideas: average FVC values, drop later values, or simply pick the highest values.
\n\nHope this helps!
", "votes": null, "replies": [] } ], "raw_markdown_by_id": { "942285": "In train dataset, the patient with ID00421637202311550012437 has different FVC at the same Week=70. Are the values wrong? Or it is allowed to measure the different FVC in the same week?\n", "942369": "This means that this patient had two FVC measurements in the same week.", "942500": "An analysis of the dataset will show that there can, in fact, be patients who have multiple FVC measurements within the same week. As Ahmed noted, this is simply one of those cases. \n\nNote, as described in the competition details:\n\n> Since this is real medical data, you will notice the relative timing of FVC measurements varies widely. The timing of the initial measurement relative to the CT scan and the duration to the forecasted time points may be different for each patient. This is considered part of the challenge of the competition. To avoid potential leakage in the timing of follow up visits, you are asked to predict every patient's FVC measurement for every possible week. Those weeks which are not in the final three visits are ignored in scoring.\n\nThere are multiple courses of action you can take to mitigate this potential issue. A few ideas: average FVC values, drop later values, or simply pick the highest values. \n\nHope this helps!" }, "source": "meta" }