Literature DB >> 17918689

Comparison of the levels of accuracy of an artificial neural network model and a logistic regression model for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Shinya Sakai1, Kuriko Kobayashi, Shin-ichi Toyabe, Nozomu Mandai, Tatsuo Kanda, Kohei Akazawa.   

Abstract

An accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the early stage is often difficult, and decision support tools to improve such a diagnosis might be required. This study compared the levels of accuracy of artificial neural network models and logistic regression models for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Data from 169 patients presenting with acute abdomen were used for the analyses. Nine variables were used for the evaluation of the accuracy of the two models. The constructed models were validated by the ".632+ bootstrap method". The levels of accuracy of the two models for diagnosis were compared by error rate and areas under receiver operating characteristic curves. The artificial neural network models provided more accurate results than did the logistic regression models for both indices, especially when categorical variables or normalized variables were used. The most accurate diagnosis was obtained by the artificial neural network model using normalized variables.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17918689     DOI: 10.1007/s10916-007-9077-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Syst        ISSN: 0148-5598            Impact factor:   4.460


  23 in total

Review 1.  Artificial neural networks: fundamentals, computing, design, and application.

Authors:  I A Basheer; M Hajmeer
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 2.363

2.  Inflation of the type I error rate when a continuous confounding variable is categorized in logistic regression analyses.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Lawrence J Brunner
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 3.  When appendicitis is suspected in children.

Authors:  C J Sivit; M J Siegel; K E Applegate; K D Newman
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.333

4.  A neural computational aid to the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  William G Baxt; Frances S Shofer; Frank D Sites; Judd E Hollander
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 5.721

5.  A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  A Alvarado
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1986-05       Impact factor: 5.721

Review 6.  Dangers of using "optimal" cutpoints in the evaluation of prognostic factors.

Authors:  D G Altman; B Lausen; W Sauerbrei; M Schumacher
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1994-06-01       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Comparison of logistic regression and neural network analysis applied to predicting living setting after hip fracture.

Authors:  Kenneth J Ottenbacher; Richard T Linn; Pamela M Smith; Sandra B Illig; Melodee Mancuso; Carl V Granger
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.797

8.  The assessment of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  A Marchand; F Van Lente; R S Galen
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 2.493

Review 9.  Meta-analysis of the clinical and laboratory diagnosis of appendicitis.

Authors:  R E B Andersson
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.939

10.  Noise-injected neural networks show promise for use on small-sample expression data.

Authors:  Jianping Hua; James Lowey; Zixiang Xiong; Edward R Dougherty
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  7 in total

1.  Prediction of clinical conditions after coronary bypass surgery using dynamic data analysis.

Authors:  K Van Loon; F Guiza; G Meyfroidt; J-M Aerts; J Ramon; H Blockeel; M Bruynooghe; G Van den Berghe; D Berckmans
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  An approach to model Right Iliac Fossa pain using pain-only-parameters for screening acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Subhagata Chattopadhyay; Fethi Rabhi; U Rajendra Acharya; Rohan Joshi; Rudhram Gajendran
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 4.460

3.  Prediction of excess weight loss after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: data from an artificial neural network.

Authors:  Eric S Wise; Kyle M Hocking; Stephen M Kavic
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Mortality predicted accuracy for hepatocellular carcinoma patients with hepatic resection using artificial neural network.

Authors:  Herng-Chia Chiu; Te-Wei Ho; King-Teh Lee; Hong-Yaw Chen; Wen-Hsien Ho
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2013-04-30

5.  Hip fracture risk assessment: artificial neural network outperforms conditional logistic regression in an age- and sex-matched case control study.

Authors:  Wo-Jan Tseng; Li-Wei Hung; Jiann-Shing Shieh; Maysam F Abbod; Jinn Lin
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery-a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Jonas Henn; Andreas Buness; Matthias Schmid; Jörg C Kalff; Hanno Matthaei
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-10-29       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 7.  Classification Performance of Neural Networks Versus Logistic Regression Models: Evidence From Healthcare Practice.

Authors:  Richard W Issitt; Mario Cortina-Borja; William Bryant; Stuart Bowyer; Andrew M Taylor; Neil Sebire
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-02-21
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.