Dataset Information

Prediction of Long-Term Stroke Recurrence Using Machine Learning Models

ABSTRACT: Background: The long-term risk of recurrent ischemic stroke, estimated to be between 17% and 30%, cannot be reliably assessed at an individual level. Our goal was to study whether machine-learning can be trained to predict stroke recurrence and identify key clinical variables and assess whether performance metrics can be optimized. Methods: We used patient-level data from electronic health records, six interpretable algorithms (Logistic Regression, Extreme Gradient Boosting, Gradient Boosting Machine, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, Decision Tree), four feature selection strategies, five prediction windows, and two sampling strategies to develop 288 models for up to 5-year stroke recurrence prediction. We further identified important clinical features and different optimization strategies. Results: We included 2091 ischemic stroke patients. Model area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was stable for prediction windows of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years, with the highest score for the 1-year (0.79) and the lowest score for the 5-year prediction window (0.69). A total of 21 (7%) models reached an AUROC above 0.73 while 110 (38%) models reached an AUROC greater than 0.7. Among the 53 features analyzed, age, body mass index, and laboratory-based features (such as high-density lipoprotein, hemoglobin A1c, and creatinine) had the highest overall importance scores. The balance between specificity and sensitivity improved through sampling strategies. Conclusion: All of the selected six algorithms could be trained to predict the long-term stroke recurrence and laboratory-based variables were highly associated with stroke recurrence. The latter could be targeted for personalized interventions. Model performance metrics could be optimized, and models can be implemented in the same healthcare system as intelligent decision support for targeted intervention.

SUBMITTER: Abedi V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8003970 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) patients are known to have an excellent prognosis, up to 30% of patients experience disease recurrence after initial treatment. Accurately predicting disease prognosis remains a challenge given that the predictive value of several predictors remains controversial. Thus, we investigated whether machine learning (ML) approaches based on comprehensive predictors can predict the risk of structural recurrence for PTC patients.MethodsA total of 2244 patients treated with thyroid surgery and radioiodine were included. Twenty-nine perioperative variables consisting of four dimensions (demographic characteristics and comorbidities, tumor-related variables, lymph node (LN)-related variables, and metabolic and inflammatory markers) were analyzed. We applied five ML algorithms-logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest (RF), and neural network (NN)-to develop the models. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve, calibration curve, and variable importance were used to evaluate the models' performance.ResultsDuring a median follow-up of 45.5 months, 179 patients (8.0%) experienced structural recurrence. The non-stimulated thyroglobulin, LN dissection, number of LNs dissected, lymph node metastasis ratio, N stage, comorbidity of hypertension, comorbidity of diabetes, body mass index, and low-density lipoprotein were used to develop the models. All models showed a greater AUC (AUC = 0.738 to 0.767) than did the ATA risk stratification (AUC = 0.620, DeLong test: P < 0.01). The SVM, XGBoost, and RF model showed greater sensitivity (0.568, 0.595, 0.676), specificity (0.903, 0.857, 0.784), accuracy (0.875, 0.835, 0.775), positive predictive value (PPV) (0.344, 0.272, 0.219), negative predictive value (NPV) (0.959, 0.959, 0.964), and F1 score (0.429, 0.373, 0.331) than did the ATA risk stratification (sensitivity = 0.432, specificity = 0.770, accuracy = 0.742, PPV = 0.144, NPV = 0.938, F1 score = 0.216). The RF model had generally consistent calibration compared with the other models. The Tg and the LNR were the top 2 important variables in all the models, the N stage was the top 5 important variables in all the models.ConclusionsThe RF model achieved the expected prediction performance with generally good discrimination, calibration and interpretability in this study. This study sheds light on the potential of ML approaches for improving the accuracy of risk stratification for PTC patients.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered at www.chictr.org.cn (trial registration number: ChiCTR2300075574, date of registration: 2023-09-08).

Project description:BackgroundAccurate and reliable predictions of infectious disease can be valuable to public health organizations that plan interventions to decrease or prevent disease transmission. A great variety of models have been developed for this task. However, for different data series, the performance of these models varies. Hepatitis E, as an acute liver disease, has been a major public health problem. Which model is more appropriate for predicting the incidence of hepatitis E? In this paper, three different methods are used and the performance of the three methods is compared.MethodsAutoregressive integrated moving average(ARIMA), support vector machine(SVM) and long short-term memory(LSTM) recurrent neural network were adopted and compared. ARIMA was implemented by python with the help of statsmodels. SVM was accomplished by matlab with libSVM library. LSTM was designed by ourselves with Keras, a deep learning library. To tackle the problem of overfitting caused by limited training samples, we adopted dropout and regularization strategies in our LSTM model. Experimental data were obtained from the monthly incidence and cases number of hepatitis E from January 2005 to December 2017 in Shandong province, China. We selected data from July 2015 to December 2017 to validate the models, and the rest was taken as training set. Three metrics were applied to compare the performance of models, including root mean square error(RMSE), mean absolute percentage error(MAPE) and mean absolute error(MAE).ResultsBy analyzing data, we took ARIMA(1, 1, 1), ARIMA(3, 1, 2) as monthly incidence prediction model and cases number prediction model, respectively. Cross-validation and grid search were used to optimize parameters of SVM. Penalty coefficient C and kernel function parameter g were set 8, 0.125 for incidence prediction, and 22, 0.01 for cases number prediction. LSTM has 4 nodes. Dropout and L2 regularization parameters were set 0.15, 0.001, respectively. By the metrics of RMSE, we obtained 0.022, 0.0204, 0.01 for incidence prediction, using ARIMA, SVM and LSTM. And we obtained 22.25, 20.0368, 11.75 for cases number prediction, using three models. For MAPE metrics, the results were 23.5%, 21.7%, 15.08%, and 23.6%, 21.44%, 13.6%, for incidence prediction and cases number prediction, respectively. For MAE metrics, the results were 0.018, 0.0167, 0.011 and 18.003, 16.5815, 9.984, for incidence prediction and cases number prediction, respectively.ConclusionsComparing ARIMA, SVM and LSTM, we found that nonlinear models(SVM, LSTM) outperform linear models(ARIMA). LSTM obtained the best performance in all three metrics of RSME, MAPE, MAE. Hence, LSTM is the most suitable for predicting hepatitis E monthly incidence and cases number.

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.

Dataset Information

Prediction of Long-Term Stroke Recurrence Using Machine Learning Models

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets