XGBoost, A Novel Explainable AI Technique, in the Prediction of Myocardial Infarction: A UK Biobank Cohort Study.

IF 2.3 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/11795468221133611
Alexander Moore, Max Bell
{"title":"XGBoost, A Novel Explainable AI Technique, in the Prediction of Myocardial Infarction: A UK Biobank Cohort Study.","authors":"Alexander Moore,&nbsp;Max Bell","doi":"10.1177/11795468221133611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We wanted to assess if \"Explainable AI\" in the form of extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) could outperform traditional logistic regression in predicting myocardial infarction (MI) in a large cohort. Two machine learning methods, XGBoost and logistic regression, were compared in predicting risk of MI. The UK Biobank is a population-based prospective cohort including 502 506 volunteers with active consent, aged 40 to 69 years at recruitment from 2006 to 2010. These subjects were followed until end of 2019 and the primary outcome was myocardial infarction. Both models were trained using 90% of the cohort. The remaining 10% was used as a test set. Both models were equally precise, but the regression model classified more of the healthy class correctly. XGBoost was more accurate in identifying individuals who later suffered a myocardial infarction. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) scores are class size invariant. In this metric XGBoost outperformed the logistic regression model, with ROC scores of 0.86 (accuracy 0.75 (CI ±0.00379) and 0.77 (accuracy 0.77 (CI ± 0.00369) respectively. Secondly, we demonstrate how SHAPley values can be used to visualize and interpret the predictions made by XGBoost models, both for the cohort test set and for individuals. The XGBoost machine learning model shows very promising results in evaluating risk of MI in a large and diverse population. This model can be used, and visualized, both for individual assessments and in larger cohorts. The predictions made by the XGBoost models, points toward a future where \"Explainable AI\" may help to bridge the gap between medicine and data science.</p>","PeriodicalId":10419,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology","volume":"16 ","pages":"11795468221133611"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9647306/pdf/","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11795468221133611","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

We wanted to assess if "Explainable AI" in the form of extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) could outperform traditional logistic regression in predicting myocardial infarction (MI) in a large cohort. Two machine learning methods, XGBoost and logistic regression, were compared in predicting risk of MI. The UK Biobank is a population-based prospective cohort including 502 506 volunteers with active consent, aged 40 to 69 years at recruitment from 2006 to 2010. These subjects were followed until end of 2019 and the primary outcome was myocardial infarction. Both models were trained using 90% of the cohort. The remaining 10% was used as a test set. Both models were equally precise, but the regression model classified more of the healthy class correctly. XGBoost was more accurate in identifying individuals who later suffered a myocardial infarction. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) scores are class size invariant. In this metric XGBoost outperformed the logistic regression model, with ROC scores of 0.86 (accuracy 0.75 (CI ±0.00379) and 0.77 (accuracy 0.77 (CI ± 0.00369) respectively. Secondly, we demonstrate how SHAPley values can be used to visualize and interpret the predictions made by XGBoost models, both for the cohort test set and for individuals. The XGBoost machine learning model shows very promising results in evaluating risk of MI in a large and diverse population. This model can be used, and visualized, both for individual assessments and in larger cohorts. The predictions made by the XGBoost models, points toward a future where "Explainable AI" may help to bridge the gap between medicine and data science.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
XGBoost,一种新的可解释的人工智能技术,在心肌梗死的预测:英国生物银行队列研究。
我们想评估极端梯度增强(XGBoost)形式的“可解释人工智能”在预测大型队列中的心肌梗死(MI)方面是否优于传统的逻辑回归。两种机器学习方法,XGBoost和logistic回归,在预测心肌梗死风险方面进行了比较。UK Biobank是一项基于人群的前瞻性队列研究,包括50256名自愿志愿者,年龄在40至69岁之间,招募时间为2006年至2010年。这些受试者被跟踪到2019年底,主要结局是心肌梗死。两个模型都使用90%的队列进行训练。剩余的10%作为测试集。两种模型都同样精确,但回归模型对健康人群的分类更准确。XGBoost在识别后来患有心肌梗死的个体方面更准确。接收算子特征(ROC)分数是类大小不变的。在该指标中,XGBoost优于logistic回归模型,ROC评分分别为0.86(准确率0.75 (CI±0.00379))和0.77(准确率0.77 (CI±0.00369))。其次,我们展示了SHAPley值如何用于可视化和解释XGBoost模型对队列测试集和个体的预测。XGBoost机器学习模型在评估大量不同人群的心肌梗死风险方面显示出非常有希望的结果。这个模型既可以用于个人评估,也可以用于更大的群体。XGBoost模型的预测指出,未来“可解释的人工智能”可能有助于弥合医学和数据科学之间的差距。
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
Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology
Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
16
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Classification of Infiltrative Heart Diseases MORAL-STAGE System. One-Year Prognosis Difference of Myocardial Infarction With or Without Coronary Obstruction in Developing Countries: Insights From the Moroccan Experience. The Impact of a Medication Therapy Management Service on the Outcomes of Hypertension Treatment Follow-Up Care in an Ethiopian Tertiary Hospital: A Pre-Post Interventional Study. Pulmonary Hypertension and Right Ventricle: A Pathophysiological Insight. Influence of Previous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting on Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of 250 684 Patients.
×
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