Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Heart Failure Readmissions

The current ability to predict readmissions in patients with heart failure is modest at best. It is unclear whether machine learning techniques that address higher dimensional, nonlinear relationships among variables would enhance prediction. We sought to compare the effectiveness of several machine...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes 2016-11, Vol.9 (6), p.629-640
Hauptverfasser: Mortazavi, Bobak J, Downing, Nicholas S, Bucholz, Emily M, Dharmarajan, Kumar, Manhapra, Ajay, Li, Shu-Xia, Negahban, Sahand N, Krumholz, Harlan M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 640
container_issue 6
container_start_page 629
container_title Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes
container_volume 9
creator Mortazavi, Bobak J
Downing, Nicholas S
Bucholz, Emily M
Dharmarajan, Kumar
Manhapra, Ajay
Li, Shu-Xia
Negahban, Sahand N
Krumholz, Harlan M
description The current ability to predict readmissions in patients with heart failure is modest at best. It is unclear whether machine learning techniques that address higher dimensional, nonlinear relationships among variables would enhance prediction. We sought to compare the effectiveness of several machine learning algorithms for predicting readmissions. Using data from the Telemonitoring to Improve Heart Failure Outcomes trial, we compared the effectiveness of random forests, boosting, random forests combined hierarchically with support vector machines or logistic regression (LR), and Poisson regression against traditional LR to predict 30- and 180-day all-cause readmissions and readmissions because of heart failure. We randomly selected 50% of patients for a derivation set, and a validation set comprised the remaining patients, validated using 100 bootstrapped iterations. We compared C statistics for discrimination and distributions of observed outcomes in risk deciles for predictive range. In 30-day all-cause readmission prediction, the best performing machine learning model, random forests, provided a 17.8% improvement over LR (mean C statistics, 0.628 and 0.533, respectively). For readmissions because of heart failure, boosting improved the C statistic by 24.9% over LR (mean C statistic 0.678 and 0.543, respectively). For 30-day all-cause readmission, the observed readmission rates in the lowest and highest deciles of predicted risk with random forests (7.8% and 26.2%, respectively) showed a much wider separation than LR (14.2% and 16.4%, respectively). Machine learning methods improved the prediction of readmission after hospitalization for heart failure compared with LR and provided the greatest predictive range in observed readmission rates.
doi_str_mv 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.116.003039
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5459389</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1875141237</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-52ad3fd388c7bbe879732b8b3d97c78677f99bbd4c0d9a007815b32ced6a41ac3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUVFPwjAQboxGEP0L2kdfhu26re2LCVlASCAkCM9N13VQMzpsNxP-vVtAgk93-e7uu_vuA-AFoyHGCX5LZ6t0uVmny8X4s0OGCBFE-A3oYx7hgFIU315yTHrgwfsvhBISJuQe9ELWRk5YH0xGVpZHbzysCriQameshnMtnTV2C9da7az5brSHReXgtMVrOJGmbJyGKy3zvfHeVNY_grtCll4_neMAbCbjdToN5suPWTqaByomtA7iUOakyAljimaZZpRTEmYsIzmnirKE0oLzLMsjhXIuEaIMxxkJlc4TGWGpyAC8n3gPTbbXudK2drIUB2f20h1FJY34X7FmJ7bVj4ijuNXLW4LXM4GrOl21aCUoXZbS6qrxAjMa4wiHhLat9NSqXOW908VlDUaic0Fcu9Ah4uRCO_l8feVl7u_t5BcEtoYw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1875141237</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Heart Failure Readmissions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>American Heart Association Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Mortazavi, Bobak J ; Downing, Nicholas S ; Bucholz, Emily M ; Dharmarajan, Kumar ; Manhapra, Ajay ; Li, Shu-Xia ; Negahban, Sahand N ; Krumholz, Harlan M</creator><creatorcontrib>Mortazavi, Bobak J ; Downing, Nicholas S ; Bucholz, Emily M ; Dharmarajan, Kumar ; Manhapra, Ajay ; Li, Shu-Xia ; Negahban, Sahand N ; Krumholz, Harlan M</creatorcontrib><description>The current ability to predict readmissions in patients with heart failure is modest at best. It is unclear whether machine learning techniques that address higher dimensional, nonlinear relationships among variables would enhance prediction. We sought to compare the effectiveness of several machine learning algorithms for predicting readmissions. Using data from the Telemonitoring to Improve Heart Failure Outcomes trial, we compared the effectiveness of random forests, boosting, random forests combined hierarchically with support vector machines or logistic regression (LR), and Poisson regression against traditional LR to predict 30- and 180-day all-cause readmissions and readmissions because of heart failure. We randomly selected 50% of patients for a derivation set, and a validation set comprised the remaining patients, validated using 100 bootstrapped iterations. We compared C statistics for discrimination and distributions of observed outcomes in risk deciles for predictive range. In 30-day all-cause readmission prediction, the best performing machine learning model, random forests, provided a 17.8% improvement over LR (mean C statistics, 0.628 and 0.533, respectively). For readmissions because of heart failure, boosting improved the C statistic by 24.9% over LR (mean C statistic 0.678 and 0.543, respectively). For 30-day all-cause readmission, the observed readmission rates in the lowest and highest deciles of predicted risk with random forests (7.8% and 26.2%, respectively) showed a much wider separation than LR (14.2% and 16.4%, respectively). Machine learning methods improved the prediction of readmission after hospitalization for heart failure compared with LR and provided the greatest predictive range in observed readmission rates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1941-7713</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1941-7705</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.116.003039</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28263938</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Aged ; Algorithms ; Data Mining - methods ; Databases, Factual ; Female ; Heart Failure - diagnosis ; Heart Failure - therapy ; Humans ; Logistic Models ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Nonlinear Dynamics ; Patient Readmission ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Reproducibility of Results ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Support Vector Machine ; Telemedicine ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2016-11, Vol.9 (6), p.629-640</ispartof><rights>2016 American Heart Association, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-52ad3fd388c7bbe879732b8b3d97c78677f99bbd4c0d9a007815b32ced6a41ac3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-52ad3fd388c7bbe879732b8b3d97c78677f99bbd4c0d9a007815b32ced6a41ac3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3674,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28263938$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mortazavi, Bobak J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Downing, Nicholas S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bucholz, Emily M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dharmarajan, Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manhapra, Ajay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Shu-Xia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Negahban, Sahand N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krumholz, Harlan M</creatorcontrib><title>Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Heart Failure Readmissions</title><title>Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes</title><addtitle>Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes</addtitle><description>The current ability to predict readmissions in patients with heart failure is modest at best. It is unclear whether machine learning techniques that address higher dimensional, nonlinear relationships among variables would enhance prediction. We sought to compare the effectiveness of several machine learning algorithms for predicting readmissions. Using data from the Telemonitoring to Improve Heart Failure Outcomes trial, we compared the effectiveness of random forests, boosting, random forests combined hierarchically with support vector machines or logistic regression (LR), and Poisson regression against traditional LR to predict 30- and 180-day all-cause readmissions and readmissions because of heart failure. We randomly selected 50% of patients for a derivation set, and a validation set comprised the remaining patients, validated using 100 bootstrapped iterations. We compared C statistics for discrimination and distributions of observed outcomes in risk deciles for predictive range. In 30-day all-cause readmission prediction, the best performing machine learning model, random forests, provided a 17.8% improvement over LR (mean C statistics, 0.628 and 0.533, respectively). For readmissions because of heart failure, boosting improved the C statistic by 24.9% over LR (mean C statistic 0.678 and 0.543, respectively). For 30-day all-cause readmission, the observed readmission rates in the lowest and highest deciles of predicted risk with random forests (7.8% and 26.2%, respectively) showed a much wider separation than LR (14.2% and 16.4%, respectively). Machine learning methods improved the prediction of readmission after hospitalization for heart failure compared with LR and provided the greatest predictive range in observed readmission rates.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Data Mining - methods</subject><subject>Databases, Factual</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heart Failure - diagnosis</subject><subject>Heart Failure - therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Nonlinear Dynamics</subject><subject>Patient Readmission</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Support Vector Machine</subject><subject>Telemedicine</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1941-7713</issn><issn>1941-7705</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVUVFPwjAQboxGEP0L2kdfhu26re2LCVlASCAkCM9N13VQMzpsNxP-vVtAgk93-e7uu_vuA-AFoyHGCX5LZ6t0uVmny8X4s0OGCBFE-A3oYx7hgFIU315yTHrgwfsvhBISJuQe9ELWRk5YH0xGVpZHbzysCriQameshnMtnTV2C9da7az5brSHReXgtMVrOJGmbJyGKy3zvfHeVNY_grtCll4_neMAbCbjdToN5suPWTqaByomtA7iUOakyAljimaZZpRTEmYsIzmnirKE0oLzLMsjhXIuEaIMxxkJlc4TGWGpyAC8n3gPTbbXudK2drIUB2f20h1FJY34X7FmJ7bVj4ijuNXLW4LXM4GrOl21aCUoXZbS6qrxAjMa4wiHhLat9NSqXOW908VlDUaic0Fcu9Ah4uRCO_l8feVl7u_t5BcEtoYw</recordid><startdate>201611</startdate><enddate>201611</enddate><creator>Mortazavi, Bobak J</creator><creator>Downing, Nicholas S</creator><creator>Bucholz, Emily M</creator><creator>Dharmarajan, Kumar</creator><creator>Manhapra, Ajay</creator><creator>Li, Shu-Xia</creator><creator>Negahban, Sahand N</creator><creator>Krumholz, Harlan M</creator><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>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201611</creationdate><title>Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Heart Failure Readmissions</title><author>Mortazavi, Bobak J ; Downing, Nicholas S ; Bucholz, Emily M ; Dharmarajan, Kumar ; Manhapra, Ajay ; Li, Shu-Xia ; Negahban, Sahand N ; Krumholz, Harlan M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-52ad3fd388c7bbe879732b8b3d97c78677f99bbd4c0d9a007815b32ced6a41ac3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Data Mining - methods</topic><topic>Databases, Factual</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heart Failure - diagnosis</topic><topic>Heart Failure - therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Nonlinear Dynamics</topic><topic>Patient Readmission</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Support Vector Machine</topic><topic>Telemedicine</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mortazavi, Bobak J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Downing, Nicholas S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bucholz, Emily M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dharmarajan, Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manhapra, Ajay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Shu-Xia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Negahban, Sahand N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krumholz, Harlan M</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mortazavi, Bobak J</au><au>Downing, Nicholas S</au><au>Bucholz, Emily M</au><au>Dharmarajan, Kumar</au><au>Manhapra, Ajay</au><au>Li, Shu-Xia</au><au>Negahban, Sahand N</au><au>Krumholz, Harlan M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Heart Failure Readmissions</atitle><jtitle>Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes</jtitle><addtitle>Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes</addtitle><date>2016-11</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>629</spage><epage>640</epage><pages>629-640</pages><issn>1941-7713</issn><eissn>1941-7705</eissn><abstract>The current ability to predict readmissions in patients with heart failure is modest at best. It is unclear whether machine learning techniques that address higher dimensional, nonlinear relationships among variables would enhance prediction. We sought to compare the effectiveness of several machine learning algorithms for predicting readmissions. Using data from the Telemonitoring to Improve Heart Failure Outcomes trial, we compared the effectiveness of random forests, boosting, random forests combined hierarchically with support vector machines or logistic regression (LR), and Poisson regression against traditional LR to predict 30- and 180-day all-cause readmissions and readmissions because of heart failure. We randomly selected 50% of patients for a derivation set, and a validation set comprised the remaining patients, validated using 100 bootstrapped iterations. We compared C statistics for discrimination and distributions of observed outcomes in risk deciles for predictive range. In 30-day all-cause readmission prediction, the best performing machine learning model, random forests, provided a 17.8% improvement over LR (mean C statistics, 0.628 and 0.533, respectively). For readmissions because of heart failure, boosting improved the C statistic by 24.9% over LR (mean C statistic 0.678 and 0.543, respectively). For 30-day all-cause readmission, the observed readmission rates in the lowest and highest deciles of predicted risk with random forests (7.8% and 26.2%, respectively) showed a much wider separation than LR (14.2% and 16.4%, respectively). Machine learning methods improved the prediction of readmission after hospitalization for heart failure compared with LR and provided the greatest predictive range in observed readmission rates.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>28263938</pmid><doi>10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.116.003039</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1941-7713
ispartof Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2016-11, Vol.9 (6), p.629-640
issn 1941-7713
1941-7705
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5459389
source MEDLINE; American Heart Association Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Aged
Algorithms
Data Mining - methods
Databases, Factual
Female
Heart Failure - diagnosis
Heart Failure - therapy
Humans
Logistic Models
Male
Middle Aged
Nonlinear Dynamics
Patient Readmission
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Reproducibility of Results
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Support Vector Machine
Telemedicine
Time Factors
title Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Heart Failure Readmissions
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T03%3A48%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Analysis%20of%20Machine%20Learning%20Techniques%20for%20Heart%20Failure%20Readmissions&rft.jtitle=Circulation%20Cardiovascular%20quality%20and%20outcomes&rft.au=Mortazavi,%20Bobak%20J&rft.date=2016-11&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=629&rft.epage=640&rft.pages=629-640&rft.issn=1941-7713&rft.eissn=1941-7705&rft_id=info:doi/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.116.003039&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1875141237%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1875141237&rft_id=info:pmid/28263938&rfr_iscdi=true