Dataset Information

A validation of machine learning-based risk scores in the prehospital setting.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The triage of patients in prehospital care is a difficult task, and improved risk assessment tools are needed both at the dispatch center and on the ambulance to differentiate between low- and high-risk patients. This study validates a machine learning-based approach to generating risk scores based on hospital outcomes using routinely collected prehospital data. METHODS:Dispatch, ambulance, and hospital data were collected in one Swedish region from 2016-2017. Dispatch center and ambulance records were used to develop gradient boosting models predicting hospital admission, critical care (defined as admission to an intensive care unit or in-hospital mortality), and two-day mortality. Composite risk scores were generated based on the models and compared to National Early Warning Scores (NEWS) and actual dispatched priorities in a prospectively gathered dataset from 2018. RESULTS:A total of 38203 patients were included from 2016-2018. Concordance indexes (or areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve) for dispatched priorities ranged from 0.51-0.66, while those for NEWS ranged from 0.66-0.85. Concordance ranged from 0.70-0.79 for risk scores based only on dispatch data, and 0.79-0.89 for risk scores including ambulance data. Dispatch data-based risk scores consistently outperformed dispatched priorities in predicting hospital outcomes, while models including ambulance data also consistently outperformed NEWS. Model performance in the prospective test dataset was similar to that found using cross-validation, and calibration was comparable to that of NEWS. CONCLUSIONS:Machine learning-based risk scores outperformed a widely-used rule-based triage algorithm and human prioritization decisions in predicting hospital outcomes. Performance was robust in a prospectively gathered dataset, and scores demonstrated adequate calibration. Future research should explore the robustness of these methods when applied to other settings, establish appropriate outcome measures for use in determining the need for prehospital care, and investigate the clinical impact of interventions based on these methods.

SUBMITTER: Spangler D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6910679 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A validation of machine learning-based risk scores in the prehospital setting.

Spangler Douglas D Hermansson Thomas T Smekal David D Blomberg Hans H

PloS one 20191213 12

<h4>Background</h4>The triage of patients in prehospital care is a difficult task, and improved risk assessment tools are needed both at the dispatch center and on the ambulance to differentiate between low- and high-risk patients. This study validates a machine learning-based approach to generating risk scores based on hospital outcomes using routinely collected prehospital data.<h4>Methods</h4>Dispatch, ambulance, and hospital data were collected in one Swedish region from 2016-2017. Dispatch ...[more]

PMID: 31834920

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdjuvant therapy for patients with cervical cancer (CC) with intermediate-risk factors remains controversial. The objectives of the present study are to assess the prognoses of patients with early-stage CC with pathological intermediate-risk factors and to provide a reference for adjuvant therapy choice.Materials and methodsThis retrospective study included 481 patients with stage IB-IIA CC. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, machine learning (ML) algorithms, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used to develop and validate prediction models for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 35 (7.3%) patients experienced recurrence, and 20 (4.2%) patients died. Two prediction models were built for DFS and OS using clinical information, including age, lymphovascular space invasion, stromal invasion, tumor size, and adjuvant treatment. Patients were divided into high-risk or low-risk groups according to the risk score cutoff value. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significant differences in DFS (p = .001) and OS (p = .011) between the two risk groups. In the traditional Sedlis criteria groups, there were no significant differences in DFS or OS (p > .05). In the ML-based validation, the best AUCs of DFS at 2 and 5 years were 0.69/0.69, and the best AUCs of OS at 2 and 5 years were 0.88/0.63.ConclusionTwo prognostic assessment models were successfully established, and risk grouping stratified the prognostic risk of patients with CC with pathological intermediate-risk factors. Evaluation of long-term survival will be needed to corroborate these findings.Implications for practiceThe Sedlis criteria are intermediate-risk factors used to guide postoperative adjuvant treatment in patients with cervical cancer. However, for patients meeting the Sedlis criteria, the choice of adjuvant therapy remains controversial. This study developed two prognostic models based on pathological intermediate-risk factors. According to the risk score obtained by the prediction model, patients can be further divided into groups with high or low risk of recurrence and death. The prognostic models developed in this study can be used in clinical practice to stratify prognostic risk and provide more individualized adjuvant therapy choices to patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

Dataset Information

A validation of machine learning-based risk scores in the prehospital setting.

Publications

A validation of machine learning-based risk scores in the prehospital setting.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets