Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches
Prognostic modelling using standard methods is well-established, particularly for predicting risk of single diseases. Machine-learning may offer potential to explore outcomes of even greater complexity, such as premature death. This study aimed to develop novel prediction algorithms using machine-le...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2019-03, Vol.14 (3), p.e0214365 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | e0214365 |
container_title | PloS one |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Weng, Stephen F Vaz, Luis Qureshi, Nadeem Kai, Joe |
description | Prognostic modelling using standard methods is well-established, particularly for predicting risk of single diseases. Machine-learning may offer potential to explore outcomes of even greater complexity, such as premature death. This study aimed to develop novel prediction algorithms using machine-learning, in addition to standard survival modelling, to predict premature all-cause mortality.
A prospective population cohort of 502,628 participants aged 40-69 years were recruited to the UK Biobank from 2006-2010 and followed-up until 2016. Participants were assessed on a range of demographic, biometric, clinical and lifestyle factors. Mortality data by ICD-10 were obtained from linkage to Office of National Statistics. Models were developed using deep learning, random forest and Cox regression. Calibration was assessed by comparing observed to predicted risks; and discrimination by area under the 'receiver operating curve' (AUC).
14,418 deaths (2.9%) occurred over a total follow-up time of 3,508,454 person-years. A simple age and gender Cox model was the least predictive (AUC 0.689, 95% CI 0.681-0.699). A multivariate Cox regression model significantly improved discrimination by 6.2% (AUC 0.751, 95% CI 0.748-0.767). The application of machine-learning algorithms further improved discrimination by 3.2% using random forest (AUC 0.783, 95% CI 0.776-0.791) and 3.9% using deep learning (AUC 0.790, 95% CI 0.783-0.797). These ML algorithms improved discrimination by 9.4% and 10.1% respectively from a simple age and gender Cox regression model. Random forest and deep learning achieved similar levels of discrimination with no significant difference. Machine-learning algorithms were well-calibrated, while Cox regression models consistently over-predicted risk.
Machine-learning significantly improved accuracy of prediction of premature all-cause mortality in this middle-aged population, compared to standard methods. This study illustrates the value of machine-learning for risk prediction within a traditional epidemiological study design, and how this approach might be reported to assist scientific verification. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0214365 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2199320765</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A580304593</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_7593b9cec438482292b3f76f3c17bc3e</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A580304593</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-c53404b470aad026c6f6513c2275244881c0f346abd76f0cc3ea1091dd970aed3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk9uK1EAQhoMo7rr6BqIBQfRixj7k6IUwLB4GFlY83TY1nUqmh046250szsP4rlZ2ZpcZ2QtpSDqVr_7qqq6KoueczbnM-buNG30Hdt67DudM8ERm6YPolJdSzDLB5MOD_Un0JIQNY6kssuxxdCJZyXNap9Gfrx4rowfjutjVce-xhWH0GIO1Mw1jwLh1fgBrhu37eEGACz0Sf41xgx16sHHv-tHCjYR2a6LjMIzVlj7aHrzpmrgFvTYdziyC7yYDdBVB9ARfxdibClvjrGuMJj3oKQp5YHgaParBBny2f59FPz99_HH-ZXZx-Xl5vriY6awUw0ynMmHJKskZQMVEprM6S7nUQuSpSJKi4JrVMslgVeVZzbSWCJxKUFUluWAlz6KXO93euqD2lQ1K8JIqyPIsJWK5IyoHG9V704LfKgdG3RicbxT4wWiLKk9LuSo16kQWSSFEKVayprhS83xFoUnrwz7auGqx0tgNVMYj0eM_nVmrxl2rjO44LwsSeLMX8O5qxDCo1gSN1kKHbtydmxciKadzv_oHvT-7PdUAJWC62lFcPYmqRVowyRLKiaj5PRSt6fY0tWFtyH7k8PbIgZgBfw8NtVVQy-_f_p-9_HXMvj5g1wh2WAdnx6kFwzGY7EBNbRs81ndF5kxNU3RbDTVNkdpPEbm9OLygO6fbsZF_AR51GvM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2199320765</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><creator>Weng, Stephen F ; Vaz, Luis ; Qureshi, Nadeem ; Kai, Joe</creator><creatorcontrib>Weng, Stephen F ; Vaz, Luis ; Qureshi, Nadeem ; Kai, Joe</creatorcontrib><description>Prognostic modelling using standard methods is well-established, particularly for predicting risk of single diseases. Machine-learning may offer potential to explore outcomes of even greater complexity, such as premature death. This study aimed to develop novel prediction algorithms using machine-learning, in addition to standard survival modelling, to predict premature all-cause mortality.
A prospective population cohort of 502,628 participants aged 40-69 years were recruited to the UK Biobank from 2006-2010 and followed-up until 2016. Participants were assessed on a range of demographic, biometric, clinical and lifestyle factors. Mortality data by ICD-10 were obtained from linkage to Office of National Statistics. Models were developed using deep learning, random forest and Cox regression. Calibration was assessed by comparing observed to predicted risks; and discrimination by area under the 'receiver operating curve' (AUC).
14,418 deaths (2.9%) occurred over a total follow-up time of 3,508,454 person-years. A simple age and gender Cox model was the least predictive (AUC 0.689, 95% CI 0.681-0.699). A multivariate Cox regression model significantly improved discrimination by 6.2% (AUC 0.751, 95% CI 0.748-0.767). The application of machine-learning algorithms further improved discrimination by 3.2% using random forest (AUC 0.783, 95% CI 0.776-0.791) and 3.9% using deep learning (AUC 0.790, 95% CI 0.783-0.797). These ML algorithms improved discrimination by 9.4% and 10.1% respectively from a simple age and gender Cox regression model. Random forest and deep learning achieved similar levels of discrimination with no significant difference. Machine-learning algorithms were well-calibrated, while Cox regression models consistently over-predicted risk.
Machine-learning significantly improved accuracy of prediction of premature all-cause mortality in this middle-aged population, compared to standard methods. This study illustrates the value of machine-learning for risk prediction within a traditional epidemiological study design, and how this approach might be reported to assist scientific verification.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214365</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30917171</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Algorithms ; Analysis ; Artificial intelligence ; Biological Specimen Banks ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Biometrics ; Blood pressure ; Calibration ; Cancer ; Cohort analysis ; Comparative analysis ; Computer and Information Sciences ; Data mining ; Data processing ; Death ; Deep Learning ; Demographics ; Diabetic retinopathy ; Discrimination ; Epidemiology ; Ethnicity ; Family medical history ; Female ; Forests ; Health risk assessment ; Health risks ; Humans ; Learning algorithms ; Logistic Models ; Machine learning ; Male ; Medical diagnosis ; Medical prognosis ; Medical research ; Medicine ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Middle Aged ; Modelling ; Mortality ; Mortality, Premature ; Neural networks ; Novels ; Physical Sciences ; Population ; Population studies ; Population-based studies ; Predictions ; Premature mortality ; Primary care ; Prognosis ; Prospective Studies ; Questionnaires ; Regression analysis ; Regression models ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Research methodology ; Risk ; ROC Curve ; Statistical analysis ; Statistical methods ; Survival ; Systematic review ; United Kingdom ; Variables ; Vitamins</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2019-03, Vol.14 (3), p.e0214365</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2019 Weng et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2019 Weng et al 2019 Weng et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-c53404b470aad026c6f6513c2275244881c0f346abd76f0cc3ea1091dd970aed3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-c53404b470aad026c6f6513c2275244881c0f346abd76f0cc3ea1091dd970aed3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4909-0644 ; 0000-0002-5281-9590 ; 0000-0002-2184-1234</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6436798/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6436798/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79342,79343</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30917171$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Weng, Stephen F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaz, Luis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qureshi, Nadeem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kai, Joe</creatorcontrib><title>Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Prognostic modelling using standard methods is well-established, particularly for predicting risk of single diseases. Machine-learning may offer potential to explore outcomes of even greater complexity, such as premature death. This study aimed to develop novel prediction algorithms using machine-learning, in addition to standard survival modelling, to predict premature all-cause mortality.
A prospective population cohort of 502,628 participants aged 40-69 years were recruited to the UK Biobank from 2006-2010 and followed-up until 2016. Participants were assessed on a range of demographic, biometric, clinical and lifestyle factors. Mortality data by ICD-10 were obtained from linkage to Office of National Statistics. Models were developed using deep learning, random forest and Cox regression. Calibration was assessed by comparing observed to predicted risks; and discrimination by area under the 'receiver operating curve' (AUC).
14,418 deaths (2.9%) occurred over a total follow-up time of 3,508,454 person-years. A simple age and gender Cox model was the least predictive (AUC 0.689, 95% CI 0.681-0.699). A multivariate Cox regression model significantly improved discrimination by 6.2% (AUC 0.751, 95% CI 0.748-0.767). The application of machine-learning algorithms further improved discrimination by 3.2% using random forest (AUC 0.783, 95% CI 0.776-0.791) and 3.9% using deep learning (AUC 0.790, 95% CI 0.783-0.797). These ML algorithms improved discrimination by 9.4% and 10.1% respectively from a simple age and gender Cox regression model. Random forest and deep learning achieved similar levels of discrimination with no significant difference. Machine-learning algorithms were well-calibrated, while Cox regression models consistently over-predicted risk.
Machine-learning significantly improved accuracy of prediction of premature all-cause mortality in this middle-aged population, compared to standard methods. This study illustrates the value of machine-learning for risk prediction within a traditional epidemiological study design, and how this approach might be reported to assist scientific verification.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Biological Specimen Banks</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biometrics</subject><subject>Blood pressure</subject><subject>Calibration</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Computer and Information Sciences</subject><subject>Data mining</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>Death</subject><subject>Deep Learning</subject><subject>Demographics</subject><subject>Diabetic retinopathy</subject><subject>Discrimination</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Ethnicity</subject><subject>Family medical history</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Health risk assessment</subject><subject>Health risks</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Learning algorithms</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical prognosis</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Mortality, Premature</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Novels</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Population-based studies</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Premature mortality</subject><subject>Primary care</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Regression models</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Statistical methods</subject><subject>Survival</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><subject>Variables</subject><subject>Vitamins</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk9uK1EAQhoMo7rr6BqIBQfRixj7k6IUwLB4GFlY83TY1nUqmh046250szsP4rlZ2ZpcZ2QtpSDqVr_7qqq6KoueczbnM-buNG30Hdt67DudM8ERm6YPolJdSzDLB5MOD_Un0JIQNY6kssuxxdCJZyXNap9Gfrx4rowfjutjVce-xhWH0GIO1Mw1jwLh1fgBrhu37eEGACz0Sf41xgx16sHHv-tHCjYR2a6LjMIzVlj7aHrzpmrgFvTYdziyC7yYDdBVB9ARfxdibClvjrGuMJj3oKQp5YHgaParBBny2f59FPz99_HH-ZXZx-Xl5vriY6awUw0ynMmHJKskZQMVEprM6S7nUQuSpSJKi4JrVMslgVeVZzbSWCJxKUFUluWAlz6KXO93euqD2lQ1K8JIqyPIsJWK5IyoHG9V704LfKgdG3RicbxT4wWiLKk9LuSo16kQWSSFEKVayprhS83xFoUnrwz7auGqx0tgNVMYj0eM_nVmrxl2rjO44LwsSeLMX8O5qxDCo1gSN1kKHbtydmxciKadzv_oHvT-7PdUAJWC62lFcPYmqRVowyRLKiaj5PRSt6fY0tWFtyH7k8PbIgZgBfw8NtVVQy-_f_p-9_HXMvj5g1wh2WAdnx6kFwzGY7EBNbRs81ndF5kxNU3RbDTVNkdpPEbm9OLygO6fbsZF_AR51GvM</recordid><startdate>20190327</startdate><enddate>20190327</enddate><creator>Weng, Stephen F</creator><creator>Vaz, Luis</creator><creator>Qureshi, Nadeem</creator><creator>Kai, Joe</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4909-0644</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5281-9590</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2184-1234</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190327</creationdate><title>Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches</title><author>Weng, Stephen F ; Vaz, Luis ; Qureshi, Nadeem ; Kai, Joe</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-c53404b470aad026c6f6513c2275244881c0f346abd76f0cc3ea1091dd970aed3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Biological Specimen Banks</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biometrics</topic><topic>Blood pressure</topic><topic>Calibration</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Computer and Information Sciences</topic><topic>Data mining</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>Death</topic><topic>Deep Learning</topic><topic>Demographics</topic><topic>Diabetic retinopathy</topic><topic>Discrimination</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Ethnicity</topic><topic>Family medical history</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Health risk assessment</topic><topic>Health risks</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Learning algorithms</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical prognosis</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Mortality, Premature</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Novels</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Population-based studies</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Premature mortality</topic><topic>Primary care</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Regression models</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Statistical methods</topic><topic>Survival</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><topic>Variables</topic><topic>Vitamins</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Weng, Stephen F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaz, Luis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qureshi, Nadeem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kai, Joe</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Weng, Stephen F</au><au>Vaz, Luis</au><au>Qureshi, Nadeem</au><au>Kai, Joe</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2019-03-27</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e0214365</spage><pages>e0214365-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Prognostic modelling using standard methods is well-established, particularly for predicting risk of single diseases. Machine-learning may offer potential to explore outcomes of even greater complexity, such as premature death. This study aimed to develop novel prediction algorithms using machine-learning, in addition to standard survival modelling, to predict premature all-cause mortality.
A prospective population cohort of 502,628 participants aged 40-69 years were recruited to the UK Biobank from 2006-2010 and followed-up until 2016. Participants were assessed on a range of demographic, biometric, clinical and lifestyle factors. Mortality data by ICD-10 were obtained from linkage to Office of National Statistics. Models were developed using deep learning, random forest and Cox regression. Calibration was assessed by comparing observed to predicted risks; and discrimination by area under the 'receiver operating curve' (AUC).
14,418 deaths (2.9%) occurred over a total follow-up time of 3,508,454 person-years. A simple age and gender Cox model was the least predictive (AUC 0.689, 95% CI 0.681-0.699). A multivariate Cox regression model significantly improved discrimination by 6.2% (AUC 0.751, 95% CI 0.748-0.767). The application of machine-learning algorithms further improved discrimination by 3.2% using random forest (AUC 0.783, 95% CI 0.776-0.791) and 3.9% using deep learning (AUC 0.790, 95% CI 0.783-0.797). These ML algorithms improved discrimination by 9.4% and 10.1% respectively from a simple age and gender Cox regression model. Random forest and deep learning achieved similar levels of discrimination with no significant difference. Machine-learning algorithms were well-calibrated, while Cox regression models consistently over-predicted risk.
Machine-learning significantly improved accuracy of prediction of premature all-cause mortality in this middle-aged population, compared to standard methods. This study illustrates the value of machine-learning for risk prediction within a traditional epidemiological study design, and how this approach might be reported to assist scientific verification.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>30917171</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0214365</doi><tpages>e0214365</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4909-0644</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5281-9590</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2184-1234</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
ispartof | PloS one, 2019-03, Vol.14 (3), p.e0214365 |
issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2199320765 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
subjects | Adult Aged Algorithms Analysis Artificial intelligence Biological Specimen Banks Biology and Life Sciences Biometrics Blood pressure Calibration Cancer Cohort analysis Comparative analysis Computer and Information Sciences Data mining Data processing Death Deep Learning Demographics Diabetic retinopathy Discrimination Epidemiology Ethnicity Family medical history Female Forests Health risk assessment Health risks Humans Learning algorithms Logistic Models Machine learning Male Medical diagnosis Medical prognosis Medical research Medicine Medicine and Health Sciences Middle Aged Modelling Mortality Mortality, Premature Neural networks Novels Physical Sciences Population Population studies Population-based studies Predictions Premature mortality Primary care Prognosis Prospective Studies Questionnaires Regression analysis Regression models Research and Analysis Methods Research methodology Risk ROC Curve Statistical analysis Statistical methods Survival Systematic review United Kingdom Variables Vitamins |
title | Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T13%3A32%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prediction%20of%20premature%20all-cause%20mortality:%20A%20prospective%20general%20population%20cohort%20study%20comparing%20machine-learning%20and%20standard%20epidemiological%20approaches&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Weng,%20Stephen%20F&rft.date=2019-03-27&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e0214365&rft.pages=e0214365-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0214365&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA580304593%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2199320765&rft_id=info:pmid/30917171&rft_galeid=A580304593&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_7593b9cec438482292b3f76f3c17bc3e&rfr_iscdi=true |