Dataset Information

Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare machine learning methods for predicting inpatient seizures risk and determine the feasibility of 1-h screening EEG to identify low-risk patients (<5% seizures risk in 48 h).

Methods

The Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium (CCEMRC) multicenter database contains 7716 continuous EEGs (cEEG). Neural networks (NN), elastic net logistic regression (EN), and sparse linear integer model (RiskSLIM) were trained to predict seizures. RiskSLIM was used previously to generate 2HELPS2B model of seizure predictions. Data were divided into training (60% for model fitting) and evaluation (40% for model evaluation) cohorts. Performance was measured using area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), mean risk calibration (CAL), and negative predictive value (NPV). A secondary analysis was performed using Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) to normalize all EEG recordings to 48 h and use only the first hour of EEG as a "screening EEG" to generate predictions.

Results

RiskSLIM recreated the 2HELPS2B model. All models had comparable AUC: evaluation cohort (NN: 0.85, EN: 0.84, 2HELPS2B: 0.83) and MCS (NN: 0.82, EN; 0.82, 2HELPS2B: 0.81) and NPV (absence of seizures in the group that the models predicted to be low risk): evaluation cohort (NN: 97%, EN: 97%, 2HELPS2B: 97%) and MCS (NN: 97%, EN: 99%, 2HELPS2B: 97%). 2HELPS2B model was able to identify the largest proportion of low-risk patients.

Interpretation

For seizure risk stratification of hospitalized patients, the RiskSLIM generated 2HELPS2B model compares favorably to the complex NN and EN generated models. 2HELPS2B is able to accurately and quickly identify low-risk patients with only a 1-h screening EEG.

SUBMITTER: Struck AF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6649418 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients.

Struck Aaron F AF Rodriguez-Ruiz Andres A AA Osman Gamaledin G Gilmore Emily J EJ Haider Hiba A HA Dhakar Monica B MB Schrettner Matthew M Lee Jong W JW Gaspard Nicolas N Hirsch Lawrence J LJ Westover M Brandon MB

Annals of clinical and translational neurology 20190627 7

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare machine learning methods for predicting inpatient seizures risk and determine the feasibility of 1-h screening EEG to identify low-risk patients (<5% seizures risk in 48 h).<h4>Methods</h4>The Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium (CCEMRC) multicenter database contains 7716 continuous EEGs (cEEG). Neural networks (NN), elastic net logistic regression (EN), and sparse linear integer model (RiskSLIM) were trained to predict seizures. RiskSLIM was used previo ...[more]

PMID: 31353866

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAccidental hypothermia is a critical condition with high risks of fatal arrhythmia, multiple organ failure, and mortality; however, there is no established model to predict the mortality. The present study aimed to develop and validate machine learning-based models for predicting in-hospital mortality using easily available data at hospital admission among the patients with accidental hypothermia.MethodThis study was secondary analysis of multi-center retrospective cohort study (J-point registry) including patients with accidental hypothermia. Adult patients with body temperature 35.0 °C or less at emergency department were included. Prediction models for in-hospital mortality using machine learning (lasso, random forest, and gradient boosting tree) were made in development cohort from six hospitals, and the predictive performance were assessed in validation cohort from other six hospitals. As a reference, we compared the SOFA score and 5A score.ResultsWe included total 532 patients in the development cohort [N = 288, six hospitals, in-hospital mortality: 22.0% (64/288)], and the validation cohort [N = 244, six hospitals, in-hospital mortality 27.0% (66/244)]. The C-statistics [95% CI] of the models in validation cohorts were as follows: lasso 0.784 [0.717-0.851] , random forest 0.794[0.735-0.853], gradient boosting tree 0.780 [0.714-0.847], SOFA 0.787 [0.722-0.851], and 5A score 0.750[0.681-0.820]. The calibration plot showed that these models were well calibrated to observed in-hospital mortality. Decision curve analysis indicated that these models obtained clinical net-benefit.ConclusionThis multi-center retrospective cohort study indicated that machine learning-based prediction models could accurately predict in-hospital mortality in validation cohort among the accidental hypothermia patients. These models might be able to support physicians and patient's decision-making. However, the applicability to clinical settings, and the actual clinical utility is still unclear; thus, further prospective study is warranted to evaluate the clinical usefulness.

Project description:IntroductionPatients with sepsis who present to an emergency department (ED) have highly variable underlying disease severity, and can be categorized from low to high risk. Development of a risk stratification tool for these patients is important for appropriate triage and early treatment. The aim of this study was to develop machine learning models predicting 31-day mortality in patients presenting to the ED with sepsis and to compare these to internal medicine physicians and clinical risk scores.MethodsA single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted amongst 1,344 emergency department patients fulfilling sepsis criteria. Laboratory and clinical data that was available in the first two hours of presentation from these patients were randomly partitioned into a development (n = 1,244) and validation dataset (n = 100). Machine learning models were trained and evaluated on the development dataset and compared to internal medicine physicians and risk scores in the independent validation dataset. The primary outcome was 31-day mortality.ResultsA number of 1,344 patients were included of whom 174 (13.0%) died. Machine learning models trained with laboratory or a combination of laboratory + clinical data achieved an area-under-the ROC curve of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.80-0.84) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.81-0.87) for predicting 31-day mortality, respectively. In the validation set, models outperformed internal medicine physicians and clinical risk scores in sensitivity (92% vs. 72% vs. 78%;p<0.001,all comparisons) while retaining comparable specificity (78% vs. 74% vs. 72%;p>0.02). The model had higher diagnostic accuracy with an area-under-the-ROC curve of 0.85 (95%CI: 0.78-0.92) compared to abbMEDS (0.63,0.54-0.73), mREMS (0.63,0.54-0.72) and internal medicine physicians (0.74,0.65-0.82).ConclusionMachine learning models outperformed internal medicine physicians and clinical risk scores in predicting 31-day mortality. These models are a promising tool to aid in risk stratification of patients presenting to the ED with sepsis.

Project description:AimsPredicting the risk of malignant arrhythmias (MA) in hospitalized patients with heart failure (HF) is challenging. Machine learning (ML) can handle a large volume of complex data more effectively than traditional statistical methods. This study explored the feasibility of ML methods for predicting the risk of MA in hospitalized HF patients.Methods and resultsWe evaluated the baseline data and MA events of 2794 hospitalized HF patients in the HF cohort in Anhui Province and randomly divided the study population into training and validation sets in a 7:3 ratio. The Lasso-logistic regression, multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), classification and regression tree (CART), random forest (RF), and eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithms were used to construct risk prediction models in the training set, and model performance was verified in the validation set. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Brier score were employed to evaluate the discrimination and calibration of the model, respectively. Clinical utility of the Lasso-logistic regression model was analysed using decision curve analysis (DCA). The median (Q1, Q3) age of the study population was 70 (61, 77) years, and 39.5% were female. MA events occurred in 117 patients (4.2%) during hospitalization. In the training set (n = 1964), the AUC of the XGBoost model was 0.998 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.997-1.000], which was higher than the other models (all P < 0.001). In the validation set (n = 830), there was no significant difference in AUC of Lasso-logistic model 1 [AUC: 0.867 (95% CI 0.819-0.915)], Lasso-logistic model 2 [AUC: 0.828 (95% CI 0.764-0.892)], MARS model [AUC: 0.852 (95% CI 0.793-0.910)], RF model [AUC: 0.804 (95% CI 0.726-0.881)], and XGBoost model [AUC: 0.864 (95% CI 0.810-0.918); all P > 0.05], which were higher than that of CART model [AUC: 0.743 (95% CI 0.661-0.824); all P < 0.05]. Brier scores for all prediction models were less than 0.05. DCA results showed that the Lasso-logistic model had a net clinical benefit. Oral antiarrhythmic drug, left bundle branch block, serum magnesium, d-dimer, and random blood glucose were significant predictors in half or more of the models.ConclusionsThe current study findings suggest that ML models based on the Lasso-logistic regression, MARS, RF, and XGBoost algorithms can effectively predict the risk of MA in hospitalized HF patients. The Lasso-logistic model had better clinical interpretability and ease of use than the other models.

Dataset Information

Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients.

Objective

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets