Literature DB >> 35502445

Comparison Between Statistical Model and Machine Learning Methods for Predicting the Risk of Renal Function Decline Using Routine Clinical Data in Health Screening.

Xia Cao1,2,3, Yanhui Lin1,2,3, Binfang Yang1,2,3, Ying Li1,2,3, Jiansong Zhou4.   

Abstract

Purpose: Using machine learning method to predict and judge unknown data offers opportunity to improve accuracy by exploring complex interactions between risk factors. Therefore, we evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) algorithms and to compare them with logistic regression for predicting the risk of renal function decline (RFD) using routine clinical data. Patients and
Methods: This retrospective cohort study includes datasets from 2166 subjects, aged 35-74 years old, provided by an adult health screening follow-up program between 2010 and 2020. Seven different ML models were considered - random forest, gradient boosting, multilayer perceptron, support vector machine, K-nearest neighbors, adaptive boosting, and decision tree - and were compared with standard logistic regression. There were 24 independent variables, and the baseline estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was used as the predictive variable.
Results: A total of 2166 participants (mean age 49.2±11.2 years old, 63.3% males) were enrolled and randomly divided into a training set (n=1732) and a test set (n=434). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for detecting RFD corresponding to the different models were above 0.85 during the training phase. The gradient boosting algorithms exhibited the best average prediction accuracy (AUROC: 0.914) among all algorithms validated in this study. Based on AUROC, the ML algorithms improved the RFD prediction performance, compared to logistic regression model (AUROC:0.882), except the K-nearest neighbors and decision tree algorithms (AUROC:0.854 and 0.824, respectively). However, the improvement differences with logistic regression were small (less than 4%) and nonsignificant.
Conclusion: Our results indicate that the proposed health screening dataset-based RFD prediction model using ML algorithms is readily applicable, produces validated results. But logistic regression yields as good performance as ML models to predict the risk of RFD with simple clinical predictors.
© 2022 Cao et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  algorithm; chronic kidney disease; deep learning; health examination

Year:  2022        PMID: 35502445      PMCID: PMC9056070          DOI: 10.2147/RMHP.S346856

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Manag Healthc Policy        ISSN: 1179-1594


  34 in total

1.  Differences in decline in GFR with age between males and females. Reference data on clearances of inulin and PAH in potential kidney donors.

Authors:  Ulla B Berg
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  2006-05-23       Impact factor: 5.992

2.  Index for rating diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W J YOUDEN
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1950-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  The Development of a Machine Learning Inpatient Acute Kidney Injury Prediction Model.

Authors:  Jay L Koyner; Kyle A Carey; Dana P Edelson; Matthew M Churpek
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 4.  Chronic Kidney Disease.

Authors:  Angela C Webster; Evi V Nagler; Rachael L Morton; Philip Masson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance as risk factors for development of chronic kidney disease and rapid decline in renal function in elderly.

Authors:  Hui-Teng Cheng; Jenq-Wen Huang; Chih-Kang Chiang; Chung-Jen Yen; Kuan-Yu Hung; Kwan-Dun Wu
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 6.  CKD in China: Evolving Spectrum and Public Health Implications.

Authors:  Chao Yang; Haibo Wang; Xinju Zhao; Kunihiro Matsushita; Josef Coresh; Luxia Zhang; Ming-Hui Zhao
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 8.860

7.  Validity of a Risk Prediction Equation for CKD After 10 Years of Follow-up in a Japanese Population: The Ibaraki Prefectural Health Study.

Authors:  Mitsumasa Umesawa; Toshimi Sairenchi; Yasuo Haruyama; Masanori Nagao; Kazumasa Yamagishi; Fujiko Irie; Hiroshi Watanabe; Gen Kobashi; Hiroyasu Iso; Hitoshi Ota
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 8.860

Review 8.  Machine Learning and Neurosurgical Outcome Prediction: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Joeky T Senders; Patrick C Staples; Aditya V Karhade; Mark M Zaki; William B Gormley; Marike L D Broekman; Timothy R Smith; Omar Arnaout
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2017-10-03       Impact factor: 2.104

9.  A primer on predictive models.

Authors:  Akbar K Waljee; Peter D R Higgins; Amit G Singal
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 4.488

10.  Waist circumference vs body mass index in association with cardiorespiratory fitness in healthy men and women: a cross sectional analysis of 403 subjects.

Authors:  Shiri Sherf Dagan; Shlomo Segev; Ilya Novikov; Rachel Dankner
Journal:  Nutr J       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 3.271

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.