Author: König, Sebastian; Pellissier, Vincent; Hohenstein, Sven; Bernal, Andres; Ueberham, Laura; Meierâ€Hellmann, Andreas; Kuhlen, Ralf; Hindricks, Gerhard; Bollmann, Andreas
Title: Machine ​learning algorithms for claims dataâ€based prediction of inâ€hospital mortality in patients with heart failure Cord-id: 2u7sa7l2 Document date: 2021_6_4
ID: 2u7sa7l2
Snippet: AIMS: Models predicting mortality in heart failure (HF) patients are often limited with regard to performance and applicability. The aim of this study was to develop a reliable algorithm to compute expected inâ€hospital mortality rates in HF cohorts on a population level based on administrative data comparing regression analysis with different machine learning (ML) models. METHODS AND RESULTS: Inpatient cases with primary International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health P
Document: AIMS: Models predicting mortality in heart failure (HF) patients are often limited with regard to performance and applicability. The aim of this study was to develop a reliable algorithm to compute expected inâ€hospital mortality rates in HF cohorts on a population level based on administrative data comparing regression analysis with different machine learning (ML) models. METHODS AND RESULTS: Inpatient cases with primary International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICDâ€10) encoded discharge diagnosis of HF nonâ€electively admitted to 86 German Helios hospitals between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018 were identified. The dataset was randomly split 75%/25% for model development and testing. Highly unbalanced variables were removed. Four ML algorithms were applied, and all algorithms were tuned using a grid search with multiple repetitions. Model performance was evaluated by computing receiver operating characteristic areas under the curve. In total, 59 125 cases (69.8% aged 75 years or older, 51.9% female) were investigated, and inâ€hospital mortality was 6.20%. Areas under the curve of all ML algorithms outperformed regression analysis in the testing dataset with values of 0.829 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.814–0.843] for logistic regression, 0.875 (95% CI 0.863–0.886) for random forest, 0.882 (95% CI 0.871–0.893) for gradient boosting machine, 0.866 (95% CI 0.854–0.878) for singleâ€layer neural networks, and 0.882 (95% CI 0.872–0.893) for extreme gradient boosting. Brier scores demonstrated a good calibration especially of the latter three models. CONCLUSIONS: We introduced reliable models to calculate expected inâ€hospital mortality based only on administrative routine data using ML algorithms. A broad application could supplement quality measurement programs and therefore improve future HF patient care.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- absolute value and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
- acceptable auc and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3
- account interaction and logistic regression: 1
- additional support information and logistic regression: 1
- additive model and logistic generalized additive model: 1, 2, 3
- additive model and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
- adequate calibration and logistic regression: 1, 2
- administrative database and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
- administrative database and long term mortality risk: 1
- administrative dataset and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3
- admission 10 and local difference: 1
- admission 10 and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- admission year and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
- local difference and logistic regression: 1, 2
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date