Literature DB >> 33502325

Machine Learning Approach to Decision Making for Insulin Initiation in Japanese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes (JDDM 58): Model Development and Validation Study.

Kazuya Fujihara1, Yasuhiro Matsubayashi1, Mayuko Harada Yamada1, Masahiko Yamamoto1, Toshihiro Iizuka2, Kosuke Miyamura2, Yoshinori Hasegawa2, Hiroshi Maegawa3, Satoru Kodama1, Tatsuya Yamazaki4, Hirohito Sone1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Applications of machine learning for the early detection of diseases for which a clear-cut diagnostic gold standard exists have been evaluated. However, little is known about the usefulness of machine learning approaches in the decision-making process for decisions such as insulin initiation by diabetes specialists for which no absolute standards exist in clinical settings.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to examine the ability of machine learning models to predict insulin initiation by specialists and whether the machine learning approach could support decision making by general physicians for insulin initiation in patients with type 2 diabetes.
METHODS: Data from patients prescribed hypoglycemic agents from December 2009 to March 2015 were extracted from diabetes specialists' registries, resulting in a sample size of 4860 patients who had received initial monotherapy with either insulin (n=293) or noninsulin (n=4567). Neural network output was insulin initiation ranging from 0 to 1 with a cutoff of >0.5 for the dichotomous classification. Accuracy, recall, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated to compare the ability of machine learning models to make decisions regarding insulin initiation to the decision-making ability of logistic regression and general physicians. By comparing the decision-making ability of machine learning and logistic regression to that of general physicians, 7 cases were chosen based on patient information as the gold standard based on the agreement of 8 of the 9 specialists.
RESULTS: The AUCs, accuracy, and recall of logistic regression were higher than those of machine learning (AUCs of 0.89-0.90 for logistic regression versus 0.67-0.74 for machine learning). When the examination was limited to cases receiving insulin, discrimination by machine learning was similar to that of logistic regression analysis (recall of 0.05-0.68 for logistic regression versus 0.11-0.52 for machine learning). Accuracies of logistic regression, a machine learning model (downsampling ratio of 1:8), and general physicians were 0.80, 0.70, and 0.66, respectively, for 43 randomly selected cases. For the 7 gold standard cases, the accuracies of logistic regression and the machine learning model were 1.00 and 0.86, respectively, with a downsampling ratio of 1:8, which were higher than the accuracy of general physicians (ie, 0.43).
CONCLUSIONS: Although we found no superior performance of machine learning over logistic regression, machine learning had higher accuracy in prediction of insulin initiation than general physicians, defined by diabetes specialists' choice of the gold standard. Further study is needed before the use of machine learning-based decision support systems for insulin initiation can be incorporated into clinical practice. ©Kazuya Fujihara, Yasuhiro Matsubayashi, Mayuko Harada Yamada, Masahiko Yamamoto, Toshihiro Iizuka, Kosuke Miyamura, Yoshinori Hasegawa, Hiroshi Maegawa, Satoru Kodama, Tatsuya Yamazaki, Hirohito Sone. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (http://medinform.jmir.org), 27.01.2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diabetes specialists; hypoglycemic prescription; initial therapy; machine learning; patterns of usage

Year:  2021        PMID: 33502325      PMCID: PMC7875702          DOI: 10.2196/22148

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JMIR Med Inform


  25 in total

1.  The status of diabetes control and antidiabetic drug therapy in Japan--a cross-sectional survey of 17,000 patients with diabetes mellitus (JDDM 1).

Authors:  Masashi Kobayashi; Katsuya Yamazaki; Koichi Hirao; Mariko Oishi; Azuma Kanatsuka; Mikio Yamauchi; Hirofumi Takagi; Koichi Kawai
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2006-04-18       Impact factor: 5.602

2.  A systematic review shows no performance benefit of machine learning over logistic regression for clinical prediction models.

Authors:  Evangelia Christodoulou; Jie Ma; Gary S Collins; Ewout W Steyerberg; Jan Y Verbakel; Ben Van Calster
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 3.  Machine Learning in Medicine.

Authors:  Alvin Rajkomar; Jeffrey Dean; Isaac Kohane
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Reply to the letter to the editor 'Man against machine: diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional neural network for dermoscopic melanoma recognition in comparison to 58 dermatologists' by H. A. Haenssle et al.

Authors:  H A Haenssle; C Fink; A Rosenberger; L Uhlmann
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 32.976

5.  Unintended Consequences of Machine Learning in Medicine.

Authors:  Federico Cabitza; Raffaele Rasoini; Gian Franco Gensini
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Addendum. 9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020. Diabetes Care 2020;43(Suppl. 1):S98-S110.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 19.112

7.  Mortality risk prediction in burn injury: Comparison of logistic regression with machine learning approaches.

Authors:  Neophytos Stylianou; Artur Akbarov; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Iain Buchan; Ken W Dunn
Journal:  Burns       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 2.744

8.  Changes in oral antidiabetic prescriptions and improved glycemic control during the years 2002-2011 in Japan (JDDM32).

Authors:  Mariko Oishi; Katsuya Yamazaki; Fuminobu Okuguchi; Hidekatsu Sugimoto; Azuma Kanatsuka; Atsunori Kashiwagi
Journal:  J Diabetes Investig       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 4.232

Review 9.  Artificial Intelligence Applications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Care: Focus on Machine Learning Methods.

Authors:  Shahabeddin Abhari; Sharareh R Niakan Kalhori; Mehdi Ebrahimi; Hajar Hasannejadasl; Ali Garavand
Journal:  Healthc Inform Res       Date:  2019-10-31

10.  Comparison of clinical characteristics in patients with type 2 diabetes among whom different antihyperglycemic agents were prescribed as monotherapy or combination therapy by diabetes specialists.

Authors:  Kazuya Fujihara; Osamu Hanyu; Yoriko Heianza; Akiko Suzuki; Takaho Yamada; Hiroki Yokoyama; Shiro Tanaka; Hiroaki Yagyu; Hitoshi Shimano; Atsunori Kashiwagi; Katuya Yamazaki; Koichi Kawai; Hirohito Sone
Journal:  J Diabetes Investig       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 4.232

View more
  1 in total

1.  Hard Voting Ensemble Approach for the Detection of Type 2 Diabetes in Mexican Population with Non-Glucose Related Features.

Authors:  Jorge A Morgan-Benita; Carlos E Galván-Tejada; Miguel Cruz; Jorge I Galván-Tejada; Hamurabi Gamboa-Rosales; Jose G Arceo-Olague; Huizilopoztli Luna-García; José M Celaya-Padilla
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-22
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.