The most efficient machine learning algorithms in stroke prediction: A systematic review

IF 2.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Health Science Reports Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1002/hsr2.70062
Farkhondeh Asadi, Milad Rahimi, Amir Hossein Daeechini, Atefeh Paghe
{"title":"The most efficient machine learning algorithms in stroke prediction: A systematic review","authors":"Farkhondeh Asadi,&nbsp;Milad Rahimi,&nbsp;Amir Hossein Daeechini,&nbsp;Atefeh Paghe","doi":"10.1002/hsr2.70062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background and Aims</h3>\n \n <p>Stroke is one of the most common causes of death worldwide, leading to numerous complications and significantly diminishing the quality of life for those affected. The purpose of this study is to systematically review published papers on stroke prediction using machine learning algorithms and introduce the most efficient machine learning algorithms and compare their performance. The papers have published in period from 2019 to August 2023.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The authors conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE using the keywords “Artificial Intelligence,” “Predictive Modeling,” “Machine Learning,” “Stroke,” and “Cerebrovascular Accident” from 2019 to August 2023.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty articles were included based on the inclusion criteria. The Random Forest (RF) algorithm was introduced as the best and most efficient stroke ML algorithm in 25% of the articles (<i>n</i> = 5). In addition, in other articles, Support Vector Machines (SVM), Stacking and XGBOOST, DSGD, COX&amp; GBT, ANN, NB, and RXLM algorithms were introduced as the best and most efficient ML algorithms in stroke prediction.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This research has shown a rapid increase in using ML algorithms to predict stroke, with significant improvements in model accuracy in recent years. However, no model has reached 100% accuracy or is entirely error-free. Variations in algorithm efficiency and accuracy stem from differences in sample sizes, datasets, and data types. Further studies should focus on consistent datasets, sample sizes, and data types for more reliable outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36518,"journal":{"name":"Health Science Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11443322/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Science Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.70062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Aims

Stroke is one of the most common causes of death worldwide, leading to numerous complications and significantly diminishing the quality of life for those affected. The purpose of this study is to systematically review published papers on stroke prediction using machine learning algorithms and introduce the most efficient machine learning algorithms and compare their performance. The papers have published in period from 2019 to August 2023.

Methods

The authors conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE using the keywords “Artificial Intelligence,” “Predictive Modeling,” “Machine Learning,” “Stroke,” and “Cerebrovascular Accident” from 2019 to August 2023.

Results

Twenty articles were included based on the inclusion criteria. The Random Forest (RF) algorithm was introduced as the best and most efficient stroke ML algorithm in 25% of the articles (n = 5). In addition, in other articles, Support Vector Machines (SVM), Stacking and XGBOOST, DSGD, COX& GBT, ANN, NB, and RXLM algorithms were introduced as the best and most efficient ML algorithms in stroke prediction.

Conclusion

This research has shown a rapid increase in using ML algorithms to predict stroke, with significant improvements in model accuracy in recent years. However, no model has reached 100% accuracy or is entirely error-free. Variations in algorithm efficiency and accuracy stem from differences in sample sizes, datasets, and data types. Further studies should focus on consistent datasets, sample sizes, and data types for more reliable outcomes.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中风预测中最有效的机器学习算法:系统综述。
背景和目的:中风是全球最常见的死亡原因之一,会导致多种并发症,大大降低患者的生活质量。本研究旨在系统回顾已发表的使用机器学习算法预测脑卒中的论文,介绍最有效的机器学习算法并比较其性能。这些论文发表于 2019 年至 2023 年 8 月:作者使用关键词 "人工智能"、"预测建模"、"机器学习"、"中风 "和 "脑血管意外 "在 PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science 和 IEEE 中进行了系统检索:根据纳入标准,共纳入 20 篇文章。在25%的文章(n = 5)中,随机森林(RF)算法被认为是最好、最有效的卒中ML算法。此外,在其他文章中,支持向量机(SVM)、堆叠和 XGBOOST、DSGD、COX& GBT、ANN、NB 和 RXLM 算法被认为是预测中风的最佳和最有效的 ML 算法:这项研究表明,近年来使用 ML 算法预测脑卒中的人数迅速增加,模型的准确性也显著提高。然而,没有一个模型能达到 100% 的准确率或完全无误。算法效率和准确性的差异源于样本量、数据集和数据类型的不同。进一步的研究应关注一致的数据集、样本大小和数据类型,以获得更可靠的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Science Reports
Health Science Reports Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
458
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluation and Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Cryotherapy and Electrosurgery in the Treatment of Sebaceous Hyperplasia, Seborrheic Keratosis, Cherry Angioma, and Skin Tag: A Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial Study. The Association of Nasal and Blood Eosinophils with Serum IgE Level in Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma: A Case-Control Study. Unacceptable Behaviors Towards Health Professional Clinical Students: Protocol For a Mixed-Methods Study. Workup of Parkinson's Disease, Parkinson Plus, Lewy Body, and Alzheimer's Dementia Should Include SPECT, PET and Genetics. Does preprocedural ultrasound prior to lumbar neuraxial anesthesia or analgesia increase first-pass success in adults with obesity? A systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1