Machine Learning Compared With Conventional Statistical Models for Predicting Myocardial Infarction Readmission and Mortality: A Systematic Review

医学 机器学习 心肌梗塞 心脏病学 重症监护医学 内科学 计算机科学
作者
Sung Min Cho,Peter C. Austin,Heather J. Ross,Husam Abdel‐Qadir,Davide Chicco,George Tomlinson,Cameron Taheri,Farid Foroutan,Patrick R. Lawler,Filio Billia,Anthony O. Gramolini,Slava Epelman,Bo Wang,Douglas S. Lee
出处
期刊:Canadian Journal of Cardiology [Elsevier]
卷期号:37 (8): 1207-1214 被引量:43
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.cjca.2021.02.020
摘要

Machine learning (ML) methods are increasingly used in addition to conventional statistical modelling (CSM) for predicting readmission and mortality in patients with myocardial infarction (MI). However, the two approaches have not been systematically compared across studies of prognosis in patients with MI.Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed the literature via Medline, EPub, Cochrane Central, Embase, Inspec, ACM Digital Library, and Web of Science. Eligible studies included primary research articles published from January 2000 to March 2020, comparing ML and CSM for prognostication after MI.Of 7,348 articles, 112 underwent full-text review, with the final set composed of 24 articles representing 374,365 patients. ML methods included artificial neural networks (n = 12 studies), random forests (n = 11), decision trees (n = 8), support vector machines (n = 8), and Bayesian techniques (n = 7). CSM included logistic regression (n = 19 studies), existing CSM-derived risk scores (n = 12), and Cox regression (n = 2). Thirteen of 19 studies examining mortality reported higher C-indexes with the use of ML compared with CSM. One study examined readmissions at 2 different time points, with C-indexes that were higher for ML than CSM. Across all studies, a total of 29 comparisons were performed, but the majority (n = 26, 90%) found small (< 0.05) absolute differences in the C-index between ML and CSM. With the use of a modified CHARMS checklist, sources of bias were identifiable in the majority of studies, and only 2 were externally validated.Although ML algorithms tended to have higher C-indexes than CSM for predicting death or readmission after MI, these studies exhibited threats to internal validity and were often unvalidated. Further comparisons are needed, with adherence to clinical quality standards for prognosis research. (Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42019134896).

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
感动蓝发布了新的文献求助10
刚刚
刚刚
刚刚
李爱国应助格拉莫巴德文采纳,获得10
1秒前
QQQ发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
yeethe发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
彩色亿先发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
cc哈库纳玛塔塔完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
bkagyin应助鲤鱼平蓝采纳,获得10
2秒前
虚幻的不评完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
2秒前
3秒前
坚强念真发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
4秒前
弦子发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
4秒前
5秒前
善学以致用应助lilchi采纳,获得10
5秒前
5秒前
昧冒冰完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
科研小白完成签到,获得积分20
5秒前
spotlight发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
6秒前
6秒前
华桦子完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
wydkyd发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
7秒前
英俊的铭应助Lylin采纳,获得10
7秒前
燕燕完成签到,获得积分20
7秒前
小太阳发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
liyongqing发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
华桦子发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
汉堡包应助Eternity采纳,获得10
9秒前
10秒前
後zgw发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
科研小白发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
Summer发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
今后应助感动蓝采纳,获得10
12秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Aerospace Standards Index - 2026 ASIN2026 3000
Polymorphism and polytypism in crystals 1000
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
Discrete-Time Signals and Systems 610
Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, 9th Edition 500
Social Work and Social Welfare: An Invitation(7th Edition) 410
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 纳米技术 有机化学 物理 生物化学 化学工程 计算机科学 复合材料 内科学 催化作用 光电子学 物理化学 电极 冶金 遗传学 细胞生物学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6048799
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 7833825
关于积分的说明 16260792
捐赠科研通 5194044
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2779244
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1762491
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1644666