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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes 2016-11, Vol.9 (6), p.629-640 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
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 |