Literature DB >> 25579635

A spline-based tool to assess and visualize the calibration of multiclass risk predictions.

K Van Hoorde1, S Van Huffel1, D Timmerman2, T Bourne3, B Van Calster4.   

Abstract

When validating risk models (or probabilistic classifiers), calibration is often overlooked. Calibration refers to the reliability of the predicted risks, i.e. whether the predicted risks correspond to observed probabilities. In medical applications this is important because treatment decisions often rely on the estimated risk of disease. The aim of this paper is to present generic tools to assess the calibration of multiclass risk models. We describe a calibration framework based on a vector spline multinomial logistic regression model. This framework can be used to generate calibration plots and calculate the estimated calibration index (ECI) to quantify lack of calibration. We illustrate these tools in relation to risk models used to characterize ovarian tumors. The outcome of the study is the surgical stage of the tumor when relevant and the final histological outcome, which is divided into five classes: benign, borderline malignant, stage I, stage II-IV, and secondary metastatic cancer. The 5909 patients included in the study are randomly split into equally large training and test sets. We developed and tested models using the following algorithms: logistic regression, support vector machines, k nearest neighbors, random forest, naive Bayes and nearest shrunken centroids. Multiclass calibration plots are interesting as an approach to visualizing the reliability of predicted risks. The ECI is a convenient tool for comparing models, but is less informative and interpretable than calibration plots. In our case study, logistic regression and random forest showed the highest degree of calibration, and the naive Bayes the lowest.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Calibration; Logistic regression; Machine learning; Multiclass; Probability estimation; Risk models

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25579635     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2014.12.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Inform        ISSN: 1532-0464            Impact factor:   6.317


  23 in total

1.  Calibration Drift Among Regression and Machine Learning Models for Hospital Mortality.

Authors:  Sharon E Davis; Thomas A Lasko; Guanhua Chen; Michael E Matheny
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-04-16

2.  Predicting 30-Day Hospital Readmission Risk in a National Cohort of Patients with Cirrhosis.

Authors:  Jejo D Koola; Sam B Ho; Aize Cao; Guanhua Chen; Amy M Perkins; Sharon E Davis; Michael E Matheny
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Comparison of Prediction Model Performance Updating Protocols: Using a Data-Driven Testing Procedure to Guide Updating.

Authors:  Sharon E Davis; Robert A Greevy; Thomas A Lasko; Colin G Walsh; Michael E Matheny
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2020-03-04

4.  Development of an automated phenotyping algorithm for hepatorenal syndrome.

Authors:  Jejo D Koola; Sharon E Davis; Omar Al-Nimri; Sharidan K Parr; Daniel Fabbri; Bradley A Malin; Samuel B Ho; Michael E Matheny
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 6.317

5.  External validation of a prediction model for pain and functional outcome after elective lumbar spinal fusion.

Authors:  Ayesha Quddusi; Hubert A J Eversdijk; Anita M Klukowska; Marlies P de Wispelaere; Julius M Kernbach; Marc L Schröder; Victor E Staartjes
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Improving patient prostate cancer risk assessment: Moving from static, globally-applied to dynamic, practice-specific risk calculators.

Authors:  Andreas N Strobl; Andrew J Vickers; Ben Van Calster; Ewout Steyerberg; Robin J Leach; Ian M Thompson; Donna P Ankerst
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 6.317

7.  Bayesian logistic regression for online recalibration and revision of risk prediction models with performance guarantees.

Authors:  Jean Feng; Alexej Gossmann; Berkman Sahiner; Romain Pirracchio
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 4.497

8.  [Predicting prolonged length of intensive care unit stay via machine learning].

Authors:  J Y Wu; Y Lin; K Lin; Y H Hu; G L Kong
Journal:  Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban       Date:  2021-12-18

9.  Development and internal validation of a prognostic model for 15-year risk of Alzheimer dementia in primary care patients.

Authors:  Giulia Grande; Davide L Vetrano; Ettore Marconi; Elisa Bianchini; Iacopo Cricelli; Valeria Lovato; Luisa Guglielmini; Daiana Taddeo; Stefano F Cappa; Claudio Cricelli; Francesco Lapi
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 3.830

10.  Calibration drift in regression and machine learning models for acute kidney injury.

Authors:  Sharon E Davis; Thomas A Lasko; Guanhua Chen; Edward D Siew; Michael E Matheny
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 4.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.