Literature DB >> 30201458

Improving the Accuracy of Scores to Predict Gastrostomy after Intracerebral Hemorrhage with Machine Learning.

Ravi Garg1, Shyam Prabhakaran1, Jane L Holl1, Yuan Luo2, Roland Faigle3, Konrad Kording4, Andrew M Naidech5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gastrostomy placement after intracerebral hemorrhage indicates the need for continued medical care and predicts patient dependence. Our objective was to determine the optimal machine learning technique to predict gastrostomy.
METHODS: We included 531 patients in a derivation cohort and 189 patients from another institution for testing. We derived and tested predictions of the likelihood of gastrostomy placement with logistic regression using the GRAVo score (composed of Glasgow Coma Scale ≤12, age >50 years, black race, and hematoma volume >30 mL), compared to other machine learning techniques (kth nearest neighbor, support vector machines, random forests, extreme gradient boosting, gradient boosting machine, stacking). Receiver Operating Curves (Area Under the Curve, [AUC]) between logistic regression (the technique used in GRAVo score development) and other machine learning techniques were compared. Another institution provided an external test data set.
RESULTS: In the external test data set, logistic regression using the GRAVo score components predicted gastrostomy (P < 0.001), however, with a lower AUC (0.66) than kth nearest neighbors (AUC 0.73), random forests (AUC 0.74), Gradient boosting machine (AUC 0.77), extreme gradient boosting (AUC 0.77), (P < 0.01 for all compared to logistic regression). Results from the internal test set were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning techniques other than logistic regression (eg, random forests, extreme gradient boost, and kth nearest neighbors) were significantly more accurate for predicting gastrostomy using the same independent variables. Machine learning techniques may assist clinicians in identifying patients likely to need interventions.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Intracerebral hemorrhage—gastrostomy—outcomes—machine learning

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30201458      PMCID: PMC6252136          DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2018.08.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis        ISSN: 1052-3057            Impact factor:   2.136


  19 in total

Review 1.  Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards.

Authors:  A Laupacis; N Sekar; I G Stiell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-02-12       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Guidelines for the management of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.

Authors:  Lewis B Morgenstern; J Claude Hemphill; Craig Anderson; Kyra Becker; Joseph P Broderick; E Sander Connolly; Steven M Greenberg; James N Huang; R Loch MacDonald; Steven R Messé; Pamela H Mitchell; Magdy Selim; Rafael J Tamargo
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2010-07-22       Impact factor: 7.914

3.  Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Gastrostomy Tube Placement After Intracerebral Hemorrhage in the United States.

Authors:  Roland Faigle; Mona N Bahouth; Victor C Urrutia; Rebecca F Gottesman
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 7.914

4.  Cardiovascular Event Prediction by Machine Learning: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Bharath Ambale-Venkatesh; Xiaoying Yang; Colin O Wu; Kiang Liu; W Gregory Hundley; Robyn McClelland; Antoinette S Gomes; Aaron R Folsom; Steven Shea; Eliseo Guallar; David A Bluemke; João A C Lima
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 17.367

5.  Novel score predicting gastrostomy tube placement in intracerebral hemorrhage.

Authors:  Roland Faigle; Elisabeth B Marsh; Rafael H Llinas; Victor C Urrutia; Rebecca F Gottesman
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 7.914

6.  The ICH score: a simple, reliable grading scale for intracerebral hemorrhage.

Authors:  J C Hemphill; D C Bonovich; L Besmertis; G T Manley; S C Johnston
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 7.914

7.  Outcomes and Complications After Endovascular Treatment of Brain Arteriovenous Malformations: A Prognostication Attempt Using Artificial Intelligence.

Authors:  Hamed Asadi; Hong Kuan Kok; Seamus Looby; Paul Brennan; Alan O'Hare; John Thornton
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 2.104

8.  New model for predicting surgical feeding tube placement in patients with an acute stroke event.

Authors:  Perry H Dubin; Amelia K Boehme; James E Siegler; Amir Shaban; Jenifer Juengling; Karen C Albright; Sheryl Martin-Schild
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2013-08-20       Impact factor: 7.914

9.  Prospective validation of the ICH Score for 12-month functional outcome.

Authors:  J Claude Hemphill; Mary Farrant; Terry A Neill
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 9.910

10.  Predictors of recovery of functional swallow after gastrostomy tube placement for Dysphagia in stroke patients after inpatient rehabilitation: a pilot study.

Authors:  Diana Crisan; Amir Shaban; Amelia Boehme; Perry Dubin; Jenifer Juengling; Laurie A Schluter; Karen C Albright; T Mark Beasley; Sheryl Martin-Schild
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2014-08-28
View more
  1 in total

1.  Predicting 6-Month Unfavorable Outcome of Acute Ischemic Stroke Using Machine Learning.

Authors:  Xiang Li; XiDing Pan; ChunLian Jiang; MingRu Wu; YuKai Liu; FuSang Wang; XiaoHan Zheng; Jie Yang; Chao Sun; YuBing Zhu; JunShan Zhou; ShiHao Wang; Zheng Zhao; JianJun Zou
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 4.003

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.