基于机器学习的中风后临床结局预测模型与传统预后评分的比较:基于医院的多中心观察研究。

JMIR AI Pub Date : 2024-01-11 DOI:10.2196/46840
Fumi Irie, Koutarou Matsumoto, Ryu Matsuo, Yasunobu Nohara, Yoshinobu Wakisaka, Tetsuro Ago, Naoki Nakashima, Takanari Kitazono, Masahiro Kamouchi
{"title":"基于机器学习的中风后临床结局预测模型与传统预后评分的比较:基于医院的多中心观察研究。","authors":"Fumi Irie, Koutarou Matsumoto, Ryu Matsuo, Yasunobu Nohara, Yoshinobu Wakisaka, Tetsuro Ago, Naoki Nakashima, Takanari Kitazono, Masahiro Kamouchi","doi":"10.2196/46840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although machine learning is a promising tool for making prognoses, the performance of machine learning in predicting outcomes after stroke remains to be examined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to examine how much data-driven models with machine learning improve predictive performance for poststroke outcomes compared with conventional stroke prognostic scores and to elucidate how explanatory variables in machine learning-based models differ from the items of the stroke prognostic scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from 10,513 patients who were registered in a multicenter prospective stroke registry in Japan between 2007 and 2017. The outcomes were poor functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score >2) and death at 3 months after stroke. Machine learning-based models were developed using all variables with regularization methods, random forests, or boosted trees. We selected 3 stroke prognostic scores, namely, ASTRAL (Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne), PLAN (preadmission comorbidities, level of consciousness, age, neurologic deficit), and iScore (Ischemic Stroke Predictive Risk Score) for comparison. Item-based regression models were developed using the items of these 3 scores. The model performance was assessed in terms of discrimination and calibration. To compare the predictive performance of the data-driven model with that of the item-based model, we performed internal validation after random splits of identical populations into 80% of patients as a training set and 20% of patients as a test set; the models were developed in the training set and were validated in the test set. We evaluated the contribution of each variable to the models and compared the predictors used in the machine learning-based models with the items of the stroke prognostic scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of the study patients was 73.0 (SD 12.5) years, and 59.1% (6209/10,513) of them were men. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves and the area under the precision-recall curves for predicting poststroke outcomes were higher for machine learning-based models than for item-based models in identical populations after random splits. Machine learning-based models also performed better than item-based models in terms of the Brier score. Machine learning-based models used different explanatory variables, such as laboratory data, from the items of the conventional stroke prognostic scores. Including these data in the machine learning-based models as explanatory variables improved performance in predicting outcomes after stroke, especially poststroke death.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Machine learning-based models performed better in predicting poststroke outcomes than regression models using the items of conventional stroke prognostic scores, although they required additional variables, such as laboratory data, to attain improved performance. Further studies are warranted to validate the usefulness of machine learning in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":73551,"journal":{"name":"JMIR AI","volume":"3 ","pages":"e46840"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11041492/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predictive Performance of Machine Learning-Based Models for Poststroke Clinical Outcomes in Comparison With Conventional Prognostic Scores: Multicenter, Hospital-Based Observational Study.\",\"authors\":\"Fumi Irie, Koutarou Matsumoto, Ryu Matsuo, Yasunobu Nohara, Yoshinobu Wakisaka, Tetsuro Ago, Naoki Nakashima, Takanari Kitazono, Masahiro Kamouchi\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/46840\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although machine learning is a promising tool for making prognoses, the performance of machine learning in predicting outcomes after stroke remains to be examined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to examine how much data-driven models with machine learning improve predictive performance for poststroke outcomes compared with conventional stroke prognostic scores and to elucidate how explanatory variables in machine learning-based models differ from the items of the stroke prognostic scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from 10,513 patients who were registered in a multicenter prospective stroke registry in Japan between 2007 and 2017. The outcomes were poor functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score >2) and death at 3 months after stroke. Machine learning-based models were developed using all variables with regularization methods, random forests, or boosted trees. We selected 3 stroke prognostic scores, namely, ASTRAL (Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne), PLAN (preadmission comorbidities, level of consciousness, age, neurologic deficit), and iScore (Ischemic Stroke Predictive Risk Score) for comparison. Item-based regression models were developed using the items of these 3 scores. The model performance was assessed in terms of discrimination and calibration. To compare the predictive performance of the data-driven model with that of the item-based model, we performed internal validation after random splits of identical populations into 80% of patients as a training set and 20% of patients as a test set; the models were developed in the training set and were validated in the test set. We evaluated the contribution of each variable to the models and compared the predictors used in the machine learning-based models with the items of the stroke prognostic scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of the study patients was 73.0 (SD 12.5) years, and 59.1% (6209/10,513) of them were men. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves and the area under the precision-recall curves for predicting poststroke outcomes were higher for machine learning-based models than for item-based models in identical populations after random splits. Machine learning-based models also performed better than item-based models in terms of the Brier score. Machine learning-based models used different explanatory variables, such as laboratory data, from the items of the conventional stroke prognostic scores. Including these data in the machine learning-based models as explanatory variables improved performance in predicting outcomes after stroke, especially poststroke death.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Machine learning-based models performed better in predicting poststroke outcomes than regression models using the items of conventional stroke prognostic scores, although they required additional variables, such as laboratory data, to attain improved performance. Further studies are warranted to validate the usefulness of machine learning in clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73551,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR AI\",\"volume\":\"3 \",\"pages\":\"e46840\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11041492/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR AI\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/46840\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR AI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/46840","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管机器学习是一种很有前途的预后工具,但它在预测中风后预后方面的表现仍有待检验:尽管机器学习是一种很有前途的预后工具,但机器学习在预测卒中后预后方面的表现仍有待研究:本研究旨在探讨与传统卒中预后评分相比,机器学习数据驱动模型在多大程度上提高了卒中后预后的预测性能,并阐明基于机器学习的模型中的解释变量与卒中预后评分项目有何不同:我们使用了 2007 年至 2017 年期间在日本多中心前瞻性卒中登记处登记的 10513 名患者的数据。卒中后 3 个月的预后为不良功能预后(改良 Rankin 量表评分大于 2 分)和死亡。我们使用正则化方法、随机森林或助推树等所有变量开发了基于机器学习的模型。我们选择了 3 个卒中预后评分,即 ASTRAL(洛桑急性卒中登记与分析)、PLAN(入院前合并症、意识水平、年龄、神经功能缺损)和 iScore(缺血性卒中预测风险评分)进行比较。利用这三种评分的项目建立了基于项目的回归模型。模型的性能从区分度和校准方面进行了评估。为了比较数据驱动模型和基于项目的模型的预测性能,我们将相同的人群随机分成 80% 的患者作为训练集,20% 的患者作为测试集,然后进行内部验证;模型在训练集中开发,在测试集中验证。我们评估了每个变量对模型的贡献,并将基于机器学习的模型中使用的预测因子与中风预后评分项目进行了比较:研究患者的平均年龄为 73.0 岁(标准差为 12.5 岁),其中 59.1%(6209/10513)为男性。在随机拆分后的相同人群中,基于机器学习的模型预测卒中后预后的接收者操作特征曲线下面积和精确度-召回曲线下面积均高于基于项目的模型。在 Brier 评分方面,基于机器学习的模型也优于基于项目的模型。基于机器学习的模型使用了与传统卒中预后评分项目不同的解释变量,如实验室数据。在基于机器学习的模型中加入这些数据作为解释变量,可提高预测中风后预后的性能,尤其是中风后死亡:基于机器学习的模型在预测卒中后预后方面的表现优于使用传统卒中预后评分项目的回归模型,尽管它们需要额外的变量(如实验室数据)才能达到更好的效果。需要进一步研究以验证机器学习在临床环境中的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Predictive Performance of Machine Learning-Based Models for Poststroke Clinical Outcomes in Comparison With Conventional Prognostic Scores: Multicenter, Hospital-Based Observational Study.

Background: Although machine learning is a promising tool for making prognoses, the performance of machine learning in predicting outcomes after stroke remains to be examined.

Objective: This study aims to examine how much data-driven models with machine learning improve predictive performance for poststroke outcomes compared with conventional stroke prognostic scores and to elucidate how explanatory variables in machine learning-based models differ from the items of the stroke prognostic scores.

Methods: We used data from 10,513 patients who were registered in a multicenter prospective stroke registry in Japan between 2007 and 2017. The outcomes were poor functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score >2) and death at 3 months after stroke. Machine learning-based models were developed using all variables with regularization methods, random forests, or boosted trees. We selected 3 stroke prognostic scores, namely, ASTRAL (Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne), PLAN (preadmission comorbidities, level of consciousness, age, neurologic deficit), and iScore (Ischemic Stroke Predictive Risk Score) for comparison. Item-based regression models were developed using the items of these 3 scores. The model performance was assessed in terms of discrimination and calibration. To compare the predictive performance of the data-driven model with that of the item-based model, we performed internal validation after random splits of identical populations into 80% of patients as a training set and 20% of patients as a test set; the models were developed in the training set and were validated in the test set. We evaluated the contribution of each variable to the models and compared the predictors used in the machine learning-based models with the items of the stroke prognostic scores.

Results: The mean age of the study patients was 73.0 (SD 12.5) years, and 59.1% (6209/10,513) of them were men. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves and the area under the precision-recall curves for predicting poststroke outcomes were higher for machine learning-based models than for item-based models in identical populations after random splits. Machine learning-based models also performed better than item-based models in terms of the Brier score. Machine learning-based models used different explanatory variables, such as laboratory data, from the items of the conventional stroke prognostic scores. Including these data in the machine learning-based models as explanatory variables improved performance in predicting outcomes after stroke, especially poststroke death.

Conclusions: Machine learning-based models performed better in predicting poststroke outcomes than regression models using the items of conventional stroke prognostic scores, although they required additional variables, such as laboratory data, to attain improved performance. Further studies are warranted to validate the usefulness of machine learning in clinical settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Advancing Privacy-Preserving Health Care Analytics and Implementation of the Personal Health Train: Federated Deep Learning Study. Urgency Prediction for Medical Laboratory Tests Through Optimal Sparse Decision Tree: Case Study With Echocardiograms. Identification of Use Cases, Target Groups, and Motivations Around Adopting Smart Speakers for Health Care and Social Care Settings: Scoping Review. Evaluating ChatGPT's Efficacy in Pediatric Pneumonia Detection From Chest X-Rays: Comparative Analysis of Specialized AI Models. Enhancing Interpretable, Transparent, and Unobtrusive Detection of Acute Marijuana Intoxication in Natural Environments: Harnessing Smart Devices and Explainable AI to Empower Just-In-Time Adaptive Interventions: Longitudinal Observational Study.
×
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