Ischemic heart disease detection using selected machine learning methods

2013 ◽  
Vol 90 (8) ◽  
pp. 1734-1759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcin Ciecholewski
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhenzhen Du ◽  
Yujie Yang ◽  
Jing Zheng ◽  
Qi Li ◽  
Denan Lin ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Predictions of cardiovascular disease risks based on health records have long attracted broad research interests. Despite extensive efforts, the prediction accuracy has remained unsatisfactory. This raises the question as to whether the data insufficiency, statistical and machine-learning methods, or intrinsic noise have hindered the performance of previous approaches, and how these issues can be alleviated. OBJECTIVE Based on a large population of patients with hypertension in Shenzhen, China, we aimed to establish a high-precision coronary heart disease (CHD) prediction model through big data and machine-learning METHODS Data from a large cohort of 42,676 patients with hypertension, including 20,156 patients with CHD onset, were investigated from electronic health records (EHRs) 1-3 years prior to CHD onset (for CHD-positive cases) or during a disease-free follow-up period of more than 3 years (for CHD-negative cases). The population was divided evenly into independent training and test datasets. Various machine-learning methods were adopted on the training set to achieve high-accuracy prediction models and the results were compared with traditional statistical methods and well-known risk scales. Comparison analyses were performed to investigate the effects of training sample size, factor sets, and modeling approaches on the prediction performance. RESULTS An ensemble method, XGBoost, achieved high accuracy in predicting 3-year CHD onset for the independent test dataset with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) value of 0.943. Comparison analysis showed that nonlinear models (K-nearest neighbor AUC 0.908, random forest AUC 0.938) outperform linear models (logistic regression AUC 0.865) on the same datasets, and machine-learning methods significantly surpassed traditional risk scales or fixed models (eg, Framingham cardiovascular disease risk models). Further analyses revealed that using time-dependent features obtained from multiple records, including both statistical variables and changing-trend variables, helped to improve the performance compared to using only static features. Subpopulation analysis showed that the impact of feature design had a more significant effect on model accuracy than the population size. Marginal effect analysis showed that both traditional and EHR factors exhibited highly nonlinear characteristics with respect to the risk scores. CONCLUSIONS We demonstrated that accurate risk prediction of CHD from EHRs is possible given a sufficiently large population of training data. Sophisticated machine-learning methods played an important role in tackling the heterogeneity and nonlinear nature of disease prediction. Moreover, accumulated EHR data over multiple time points provided additional features that were valuable for risk prediction. Our study highlights the importance of accumulating big data from EHRs for accurate disease predictions.


Kardiologiia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (10) ◽  
pp. 38-46
Author(s):  
B. I. Geltser ◽  
K. J. Shahgeldyan ◽  
V. Y. Rublev ◽  
V. N. Kotelnikov ◽  
A. B. Krieger ◽  
...  

Aim      To compare the accuracy of predicting an in-hospital fatal outcome for models based on current machine-learning technologies in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) after coronary bypass (CB) surgery.Material and methods  A retrospective analysis of 866 electronic medical records was performed for patients (685 men and 181 women) who have had a CB surgery for IHD in 2008–2018. Results of clinical, laboratory, and instrumental evaluations obtained prior to the CB surgery were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 included 35 (4 %) patients who died within the first 20 days of CB, and group 2 consisted of 831 (96 %) patients with a beneficial outcome of the surgery. Predictors of the in-hospital fatal outcome were identified by a multistep selection procedure with analysis of statistical hypotheses and calculation of weight coefficients. For construction of models and verification of predictors, machine-learning methods were used, including the multifactorial logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), and artificial neural networks (ANN). Model accuracy was evaluated by three metrics: area under the ROC curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity. Cross validation of the models was performed on test samples, and the control validation was performed on a cohort of patients with IHD after CB, whose data were not used in development of the models.Results The following 7 risk factors for in-hospital fatal outcome with the greatest predictive potential were isolated from the EuroSCORE II scale: ejection fraction (EF) <30 %, EF 30-50 %, age of patients with recent MI, damage of peripheral arterial circulation, urgency of CB, functional class III-IV chronic heart failure, and 5 additional predictors, including heart rate, systolic blood pressure, presence of aortic stenosis, posterior left ventricular (LV) wall relative thickness index (RTI), and LV relative mass index (LVRMI). The models developed by the authors using LR, RF and ANN methods had higher AUC values and sensitivity compared to the classical EuroSCORE II scale. The ANN models including the RTI and LVRMI predictors demonstrated a maximum level of prognostic accuracy, which was illustrated by values of the quality metrics, AUC 93 %, sensitivity 90 %, and specificity 96 %. The predictive robustness of the models was confirmed by results of the control validation.Conclusion      The use of current machine-learning technologies allowed developing a novel algorithm for selection of predictors and highly accurate models for predicting an in-hospital fatal outcome after CB. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (11) ◽  
pp. 115008
Author(s):  
Agostino Accardo ◽  
Giulia Silveri ◽  
Marco Merlo ◽  
Luca Restivo ◽  
Miloš Ajčević ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 817-825 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanawut Tantimongcolwat ◽  
Thanakorn Naenna ◽  
Chartchalerm Isarankura-Na-Ayudhya ◽  
Mark J. Embrechts ◽  
Virapong Prachayasittikul

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document