Machine learning vs. classic statistics for the prediction of IVF outcomes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
To assess whether machine learning methods provide advantage over classic statistical modeling for the prediction of IVF outcomes.Methods
The study population consisted of 136 women undergoing a fresh IVF cycle from January 2014 to August 2016 at a tertiary, university-affiliated medical center. We tested the ability of two machine learning algorithms, support vector machine (SVM) and artificial neural network (NN), vs. classic statistics (logistic regression) to predict IVF outcomes (number of oocytes retrieved, mature oocytes, top-quality embryos, positive beta-hCG, clinical pregnancies, and live births) based on age and BMI, with or without clinical data.Results
Machine learning algorithms (SVM and NN) based on age, BMI, and clinical features yielded better performances in predicting number of oocytes retrieved, mature oocytes, fertilized oocytes, top-quality embryos, positive beta-hCG, clinical pregnancies, and live births, compared with logistic regression models. While accuracies were 0.69 to 0.9 and 0.45 to 0.77 for NN and SVM, respectively, they were 0.34 to 0.74 using logistic regression models.Conclusions
Our findings suggest that machine learning algorithms based on age, BMI, and clinical data have an advantage over logistic regression for the prediction of IVF outcomes and therefore can assist fertility specialists' counselling and their patients in adjusting the appropriate treatment strategy.
SUBMITTER: Barnett-Itzhaki Z
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7550518 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Gene expression profiles were generated from 199 primary breast cancer patients. Samples 1-176 were used in another study, GEO Series GSE22820, and form the training data set in this study. Sample numbers 200-222 form a validation set. This data is used to model a machine learning classifier for Estrogen Receptor Status. RNA was isolated from 199 primary breast cancer patients. A machine learning classifier was built to predict ER status using only three gene features.
2013-01-01 | E-GEOD-29210 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Computer assistance in synthesis design has existed for over 40 years, yet retrosynthesis planning software has struggled to achieve widespread adoption. One critical challenge in developing high-quality pathway suggestions is that proposed reaction steps often fail when attempted in the laboratory, despite initially seeming viable. The true measure of success for any synthesis program is whether the predicted outcome matches what is observed experimentally. We report a model framework for anticipating reaction outcomes that combines the traditional use of reaction templates with the flexibility in pattern recognition afforded by neural networks. Using 15 000 experimental reaction records from granted United States patents, a model is trained to select the major (recorded) product by ranking a self-generated list of candidates where one candidate is known to be the major product. Candidate reactions are represented using a unique edit-based representation that emphasizes the fundamental transformation from reactants to products, rather than the constituent molecules' overall structures. In a 5-fold cross-validation, the trained model assigns the major product rank 1 in 71.8% of cases, rank ≤3 in 86.7% of cases, and rank ≤5 in 90.8% of cases.
| S-EPMC5445544 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Acute kidney injury (AKI) after liver transplantation has been reported to be associated with increased mortality. Recently, machine learning approaches were reported to have better predictive ability than the classic statistical analysis. We compared the performance of machine learning approaches with that of logistic regression analysis to predict AKI after liver transplantation. We reviewed 1211 patients and preoperative and intraoperative anesthesia and surgery-related variables were obtained. The primary outcome was postoperative AKI defined by acute kidney injury network criteria. The following machine learning techniques were used: decision tree, random forest, gradient boosting machine, support vector machine, naïve Bayes, multilayer perceptron, and deep belief networks. These techniques were compared with logistic regression analysis regarding the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC). AKI developed in 365 patients (30.1%). The performance in terms of AUROC was best in gradient boosting machine among all analyses to predict AKI of all stages (0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86?0.93) or stage 2 or 3 AKI. The AUROC of logistic regression analysis was 0.61 (95% CI 0.56?0.66). Decision tree and random forest techniques showed moderate performance (AUROC 0.86 and 0.85, respectively). The AUROC of support the vector machine, naïve Bayes, neural network, and deep belief network was smaller than that of the other models. In our comparison of seven machine learning approaches with logistic regression analysis, the gradient boosting machine showed the best performance with the highest AUROC. An internet-based risk estimator was developed based on our model of gradient boosting. However, prospective studies are required to validate our results.
| S-EPMC6262324 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveThe management of cardiogenic shock (CS) in the elderly remains a major clinical challenge. Existing clinical prediction models have not performed well in assessing the prognosis of elderly patients with CS. This study aims to build a predictive model, which could better predict the 30-day mortality of elderly patients with CS.MethodsWe extracted data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III version 1.4 (MIMIC-III) as the training set and the data of validation sets were collected from the Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University. Three models, including the cox regression model, the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression model, and the CoxBoost model, were established using the training set. Through the comparison of area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), C index, net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and median improvement in risk score, the best model was selected. Then for external validation, compared the best model with the simplified acute physiology score II (SAPSII) and the CardShock risk score.ResultsA total of 919 patients were included in the study, of which 804 patients were in the training set and 115 patients were in the verification set. Using the training set, we built three models: the cox regression model including 6 predictors, the LASSO regression model including 4 predictors, and the CoxBoost model including 16 predictors. Among them, the CoxBoost model had good discrimination [AUC: 0.730; C index: 0.6958 (0.6657, 0.7259)]. Compared with the CoxBoost model, the NRI, IDI, and median improvement in risk score of other models were all<0. In the validation set, the CoxBoost model was also well-discriminated [AUC: 0.770; C index: 0.7713 (0.6751, 0.8675)]. Compared with the CoxBoost model, the NRI, IDI, and median improvement in risk score of SAPS II and the CardShock risk score were all < 0. And we constructed a dynamic nomogram to visually display the model.ConclusionIn conclusion, this study showed that in predicting the 30-day mortality of elderly CS patients, the CoxBoost model was superior to the Cox regression model, LASSO regression model, SAPS II, and the CardShock risk score.
| S-EPMC9120613 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHospital readmissions are associated with patient harm and expense. Ways to prevent hospital readmissions have focused on identifying patients at greatest risk using prediction scores.ObjectiveTo identify the type of score that best predicts hospital readmissions.Design, setting, and participantsThis prognostic study included 14?062 consecutive adult hospital patients with 16?649 discharges from a tertiary care center, suburban community hospital, and urban critical access hospital in Maryland from September 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016. Patients not included as eligible discharges by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services or the Chesapeake Regional Information System for Our Patients were excluded. A machine learning rank score, the Baltimore score (B score) developed using a machine learning technique, for each individual hospital using data from the 2 years before September 1, 2016, was compared with standard readmission risk assessment scores to predict 30-day unplanned readmissions.Main outcomes and measuresThe 30-day readmission rate evaluated using various readmission scores: B score, HOSPITAL score, modified LACE score, and Maxim/RightCare score.ResultsOf the 10?732 patients (5605 [52.2%] male; mean [SD] age, 54.56 [22.42] years) deemed to be eligible for the study, 1422 were readmitted. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for individual rules was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.61-0.65) for the HOSPITAL score, which was significantly lower than the 0.66 for modified LACE score (95% CI, 0.64-0.68; P?<?.001). The B score machine learning score was significantly better than all other scores; 48 hours after admission, the AUROC of the B score was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73), which increased to 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77-0.79) at discharge (all P?<?.001). At the hospital using Maxim/RightCare score, the AUROC was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.59-0.69) for HOSPITAL, 0.64 (95% CI, 0.61-0.68) for Maxim/RightCare, and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.62-0.69) for modified LACE score. The B score was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.69-0.75) 48 hours after admission and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) at discharge. In directly comparing the B score with the sensitivity at cutoff values for modified LACE, HOSPITAL, and Maxim/RightCare scores, the B score was able to identify the same number of readmitted patients while flagging 25.5% to 54.9% fewer patients.Conclusions and relevanceAmong 3 hospitals in different settings, an automated machine learning score better predicted readmissions than commonly used readmission scores. More efficiently targeting patients at higher risk of readmission may be the first step toward potentially preventing readmissions.
| S-EPMC6484642 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Gene expression profiles were generated from 199 primary breast cancer patients. Samples 1-176 were used in another study, GEO Series GSE22820, and form the training data set in this study. Sample numbers 200-222 form a validation set. This data is used to model a machine learning classifier for Estrogen Receptor Status.
2013-01-01 | GSE29210 | GEO
Project description:Clinical prediction models has been increasingly published in radiology research. In particular, as a radiomics research is being actively conducted, the prediction model is developed based on the traditional statistical model, as well as machine learning, to account for the high-dimensional data. In this review, we investigated the statistical and machine learning methods used in clinical prediction model research, and briefly summarized each analytical method for statistical model, machine learning, and statistical learning. Finally, we discussed several considerations for choosing the prediction modeling method.
| S-EPMC9748465 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough survival statistics in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) are well-defined at the group level, predicting individual patient survival remains challenging because of significant variation within strata.ObjectiveTo compare statistical and machine learning algorithms in their ability to predict survival in GBM patients and deploy the best performing model as an online survival calculator.MethodsPatients undergoing an operation for a histopathologically confirmed GBM were extracted from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (2005-2015) and split into a training and hold-out test set in an 80/20 ratio. Fifteen statistical and machine learning algorithms were trained based on 13 demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and radiographic features to predict overall survival, 1-yr survival status, and compute personalized survival curves.ResultsIn total, 20 821 patients met our inclusion criteria. The accelerated failure time model demonstrated superior performance in terms of discrimination (concordance index = 0.70), calibration, interpretability, predictive applicability, and computational efficiency compared to Cox proportional hazards regression and other machine learning algorithms. This model was deployed through a free, publicly available software interface (https://cnoc-bwh.shinyapps.io/gbmsurvivalpredictor/).ConclusionThe development and deployment of survival prediction tools require a multimodal assessment rather than a single metric comparison. This study provides a framework for the development of prediction tools in cancer patients, as well as an online survival calculator for patients with GBM. Future efforts should improve the interpretability, predictive applicability, and computational efficiency of existing machine learning algorithms, increase the granularity of population-based registries, and externally validate the proposed prediction tool.
| S-EPMC7061165 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent studies have combined multiple neuroimaging modalities to gain further understanding of the neurobiological substrates of aphasia. Following this line of work, the current study uses machine learning approaches to predict aphasia severity and specific language measures based on a multimodal neuroimaging dataset. A total of 116 individuals with chronic left-hemisphere stroke were included in the study. Neuroimaging data included task-based functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), diffusion-based fractional anisotropy (FA)-values, cerebral blood flow (CBF), and lesion-load data. The Western Aphasia Battery was used to measure aphasia severity and specific language functions. As a primary analysis, we constructed support vector regression (SVR) models predicting language measures based on (i) each neuroimaging modality separately, (ii) lesion volume alone, and (iii) a combination of all modalities. Prediction accuracy across models was subsequently statistically compared. Prediction accuracy across modalities and language measures varied substantially (predicted vs. empirical correlation range: r = .00-.67). The multimodal prediction model yielded the most accurate prediction in all cases (r = .53-.67). Statistical superiority in favor of the multimodal model was achieved in 28/30 model comparisons (p-value range: <.001-.046). Our results indicate that different neuroimaging modalities carry complementary information that can be integrated to more accurately depict how brain damage and remaining functionality of intact brain tissue translate into language function in aphasia.
| S-EPMC7978124 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDevelopment of emergency department (ED) triage systems that accurately differentiate and prioritize critically ill from stable patients remains challenging. We used machine learning models to predict clinical outcomes, and then compared their performance with that of a conventional approach-the Emergency Severity Index (ESI).MethodsUsing National Hospital and Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) ED data, from 2007 through 2015, we identified all adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years). In the randomly sampled training set (70%), using routinely available triage data as predictors (e.g., demographics, triage vital signs, chief complaints, comorbidities), we developed four machine learning models: Lasso regression, random forest, gradient boosted decision tree, and deep neural network. As the reference model, we constructed a logistic regression model using the five-level ESI data. The clinical outcomes were critical care (admission to intensive care unit or in-hospital death) and hospitalization (direct hospital admission or transfer). In the test set (the remaining 30%), we measured the predictive performance, including area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) and net benefit (decision curves) for each model.ResultsOf 135,470 eligible ED visits, 2.1% had critical care outcome and 16.2% had hospitalization outcome. In the critical care outcome prediction, all four machine learning models outperformed the reference model (e.g., AUC, 0.86 [95%CI 0.85-0.87] in the deep neural network vs 0.74 [95%CI 0.72-0.75] in the reference model), with less under-triaged patients in ESI triage levels 3 to 5 (urgent to non-urgent). Likewise, in the hospitalization outcome prediction, all machine learning models outperformed the reference model (e.g., AUC, 0.82 [95%CI 0.82-0.83] in the deep neural network vs 0.69 [95%CI 0.68-0.69] in the reference model) with less over-triages in ESI triage levels 1 to 3 (immediate to urgent). In the decision curve analysis, all machine learning models consistently achieved a greater net benefit-a larger number of appropriate triages considering a trade-off with over-triages-across the range of clinical thresholds.ConclusionsCompared to the conventional approach, the machine learning models demonstrated a superior performance to predict critical care and hospitalization outcomes. The application of modern machine learning models may enhance clinicians' triage decision making, thereby achieving better clinical care and optimal resource utilization.
| S-EPMC6387562 | biostudies-literature