Appliance of Machine Learning Algorithms in Prudent Clinical Decision-Making Systems in the Healthcare Industry

Author(s):  
T. Venkat Narayana Rao ◽  
G. Akhila
2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i18-i18
Author(s):  
N Hassan ◽  
R Slight ◽  
D Weiand ◽  
A Vellinga ◽  
G Morgan ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Sepsis is a life-threatening condition that is associated with increased mortality. Artificial intelligence tools can inform clinical decision making by flagging patients who may be at risk of developing infection and subsequent sepsis and assist clinicians with their care management. Aim To identify the optimal set of predictors used to train machine learning algorithms to predict the likelihood of an infection and subsequent sepsis and inform clinical decision making. Methods This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO database (CRD42020158685). We searched 3 large databases: Medline, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Embase, using appropriate search terms. We included quantitative primary research studies that focused on sepsis prediction associated with bacterial infection in adult population (>18 years) in all care settings, which included data on predictors to develop machine learning algorithms. The timeframe of the search was 1st January 2000 till the 25th November 2019. Data extraction was performed using a data extraction sheet, and a narrative synthesis of eligible studies was undertaken. Narrative analysis was used to arrange the data into key areas, and compare and contrast between the content of included studies. Quality assessment was performed using Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment scale, which was used to evaluate the quality of non-randomized studies. Bias was not assessed due to the non-randomised nature of the included studies. Results Fifteen articles met our inclusion criteria (Figure 1). We identified 194 predictors that were used to train machine learning algorithms to predict infection and subsequent sepsis, with 13 predictors used on average across all included studies. The most significant predictors included age, gender, smoking, alcohol intake, heart rate, blood pressure, lactate level, cardiovascular disease, endocrine disease, cancer, chronic kidney disease (eGFR<60ml/min), white blood cell count, liver dysfunction, surgical approach (open or minimally invasive), and pre-operative haematocrit < 30%. These predictors were used for the development of all the algorithms in the fifteen articles. All included studies used artificial intelligence techniques to predict the likelihood of sepsis, with average sensitivity 77.5±19.27, and average specificity 69.45±21.25. Conclusion The type of predictors used were found to influence the predictive power and predictive timeframe of the developed machine learning algorithm. Two strengths of our review were that we included studies published since the first definition of sepsis was published in 2001, and identified factors that can improve the predictive ability of algorithms. However, we note that the included studies had some limitations, with three studies not validating the models that they developed, and many tools limited by either their reduced specificity or sensitivity or both. This work has important implications for practice, as predicting the likelihood of sepsis can help inform the management of patients and concentrate finite resources to those patients who are most at risk. Producing a set of predictors can also guide future studies in developing more sensitive and specific algorithms with increased predictive time window to allow for preventive clinical measures.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonu Subudhi ◽  
Ashish Verma ◽  
Ankit B. Patel ◽  
C. Corey Hardin ◽  
Melin J. Khandekar ◽  
...  

AbstractAs predicting the trajectory of COVID-19 disease is challenging, machine learning models could assist physicians determine high-risk individuals. This study compares the performance of 18 machine learning algorithms for predicting ICU admission and mortality among COVID-19 patients. Using COVID-19 patient data from the Mass General Brigham (MGB) healthcare database, we developed and internally validated models using patients presenting to Emergency Department (ED) between March-April 2020 (n = 1144) and externally validated them using those individuals who encountered ED between May-August 2020 (n = 334). We show that ensemble-based models perform better than other model types at predicting both 5-day ICU admission and 28-day mortality from COVID-19. CRP, LDH, and procalcitonin levels were important for ICU admission models whereas eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73m2, ventilator use, and potassium levels were the most important variables for predicting mortality. Implementing such models would help in clinical decision-making for future COVID-19 and other infectious disease outbreaks.


Informatics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 76
Author(s):  
Fernando Ribeiro ◽  
Filipe Fidalgo ◽  
Arlindo Silva ◽  
José Metrôlho ◽  
Osvaldo Santos ◽  
...  

Pressure ulcers are associated with significant morbidity, resulting in a decreased quality of life for the patient, and contributing to healthcare professional burnout, as well as an increase of health service costs. Their prompt diagnosis and treatment are important, and several studies have proposed solutions to help healthcare professionals in this process. This work analyzes studies that use machine-learning algorithms for risk assessment and management of preventive treatments for pressure ulcers. More specifically, it focuses on the use of machine-learning algorithms that combine information from intrinsic and extrinsic pressure-ulcer predisposing factors to produce recommendations/alerts to healthcare professionals. The review includes articles published from January 2010 to June 2021. From 60 records screened, seven articles were analyzed in full-text form. The results show that most of the proposed algorithms do not use information related to both intrinsic and extrinsic predisposing factors and that many of the approaches separately address one of the following three components: data acquisition; data analysis, and production of complementary support to well-informed clinical decision-making. Additionally, only a few studies describe in detail the outputs of the algorithm, such as alerts and recommendations, without assessing their impacts on healthcare professionals’ activities.


2021 ◽  
pp. 096032712199191
Author(s):  
B Behnoush ◽  
E Bazmi ◽  
SH Nazari ◽  
S Khodakarim ◽  
MA Looha ◽  
...  

Introduction: This study was designed to develop and evaluate machine learning algorithms for predicting seizure due to acute tramadol poisoning, identifying high-risk patients and facilitating appropriate clinical decision-making. Methods: Several characteristics of acute tramadol poisoning cases were collected in the Emergency Department (ED) (2013–2019). After selecting important variables in random forest method, prediction models were developed using the Support Vector Machine (SVM), Naïve Bayes (NB), Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and K-Nearest Neighbor (K-NN) algorithms. Area Under the Curve (AUC) and other diagnostic criteria were used to assess performance of models. Results: In 909 patients, 544 (59.8%) experienced seizures. The important predictors of seizure were sex, pulse rate, arterial blood oxygen pressure, blood bicarbonate level and pH. SVM (AUC = 0.68), NB (AUC = 0.71) and ANN (AUC = 0.70) models outperformed k-NN model (AUC = 0.58). NB model had a higher sensitivity and negative predictive value and k-NN model had higher specificity and positive predictive values than other models. Conclusion: A perfect prediction model may help improve clinicians’ decision-making and clinical care at EDs in hospitals and medical settings. SVM, ANN and NB models had no significant differences in the performance and accuracy; however, validated logistic regression (LR) was the superior model for predicting seizure due to acute tramadol poisoning.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonu Subudhi ◽  
Ashish Verma ◽  
Ankit B. Patel ◽  
C. Corey Hardin ◽  
Melin J. Khandekar ◽  
...  

AbstractAs predicting the trajectory of COVID-19 is challenging, machine learning models could assist physicians in identifying high-risk individuals. This study compares the performance of 18 machine learning algorithms for predicting ICU admission and mortality among COVID-19 patients. Using COVID-19 patient data from the Mass General Brigham (MGB) Healthcare database, we developed and internally validated models using patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) between March-April 2020 (n = 3597) and further validated them using temporally distinct individuals who presented to the ED between May-August 2020 (n = 1711). We show that ensemble-based models perform better than other model types at predicting both 5-day ICU admission and 28-day mortality from COVID-19. CRP, LDH, and O2 saturation were important for ICU admission models whereas eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2, and neutrophil and lymphocyte percentages were the most important variables for predicting mortality. Implementing such models could help in clinical decision-making for future infectious disease outbreaks including COVID-19.


Author(s):  
Prashant Johri ◽  
Vivek sen Saxena ◽  
Avneesh Kumar

With the continuous improvement of digital imaging technology and rapid increase in the use of digital medical records in last decade, artificial intelligence has provided various techniques to analyze these data. Machine learning, a subset of artificial intelligence techniques, provides the ability to learn from past and present and to predict the future on the basis of data. Various AI-enabled support systems are designed by using machine learning algorithms in order to optimize and computerize the process of clinical decision making and to bring about a massive archetype change in the healthcare sector such as timely identification, revealing and treatment of disease, as well as outcome prediction. Machine learning algorithms are implemented in the healthcare sector and helped in diagnosis of critical illness such as cancer, neurology, cardiac, and kidney disease as well as with easing in anticipation of disease progression. By applying and executing machine learning algorithms over healthcare data, one can evaluate, analyze, and generate the results that can be used not only to advance the prior health studies but also to aid in forecasting a patient's chances of developing of various diseases. The aim in this article is to present an overview of machine learning and to cover various algorithms of machine learning and their present implementation in the healthcare sector.


2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Huimin Wang ◽  
Jianxiang Tang ◽  
Mengyao Wu ◽  
Xiaoyu Wang ◽  
Tao Zhang

Abstract Background There are often many missing values in medical data, which directly affect the accuracy of clinical decision making. Discharge assessment is an important part of clinical decision making. Taking the discharge assessment of patients with spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage as an example, this study adopted the missing data processing evaluation criteria more suitable for clinical decision making, aiming at systematically exploring the performance and applicability of single machine learning algorithms and ensemble learning (EL) under different data missing scenarios, as well as whether they had more advantages than traditional methods, so as to provide basis and reference for the selection of suitable missing data processing method in practical clinical decision making. Methods The whole process consisted of four main steps: (1) Based on the original complete data set, missing data was generated by simulation under different missing scenarios (missing mechanisms, missing proportions and ratios of missing proportions of each group). (2) Machine learning and traditional methods (eight methods in total) were applied to impute missing values. (3) The performances of imputation techniques were evaluated and compared by estimating the sensitivity, AUC and Kappa values of prediction models. (4) Statistical tests were used to evaluate whether the observed performance differences were statistically significant. Results The performances of missing data processing methods were different to a certain extent in different missing scenarios. On the whole, machine learning had better imputation performance than traditional methods, especially in scenarios with high missing proportions. Compared with single machine learning algorithms, the performance of EL was more prominent, followed by neural networks. Meanwhile, EL was most suitable for missing imputation under MAR (the ratio of missing proportion 2:1) mechanism, and its average sensitivity, AUC and Kappa values reached 0.908, 0.924 and 0.596 respectively. Conclusions In clinical decision making, the characteristics of missing data should be actively explored before formulating missing data processing strategies. The outstanding imputation performance of machine learning methods, especially EL, shed light on the development of missing data processing technology, and provided methodological support for clinical decision making in presence of incomplete data.


Med ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorenz Adlung ◽  
Yotam Cohen ◽  
Uria Mor ◽  
Eran Elinav

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Brnabic ◽  
Lisa M. Hess

Abstract Background Machine learning is a broad term encompassing a number of methods that allow the investigator to learn from the data. These methods may permit large real-world databases to be more rapidly translated to applications to inform patient-provider decision making. Methods This systematic literature review was conducted to identify published observational research of employed machine learning to inform decision making at the patient-provider level. The search strategy was implemented and studies meeting eligibility criteria were evaluated by two independent reviewers. Relevant data related to study design, statistical methods and strengths and limitations were identified; study quality was assessed using a modified version of the Luo checklist. Results A total of 34 publications from January 2014 to September 2020 were identified and evaluated for this review. There were diverse methods, statistical packages and approaches used across identified studies. The most common methods included decision tree and random forest approaches. Most studies applied internal validation but only two conducted external validation. Most studies utilized one algorithm, and only eight studies applied multiple machine learning algorithms to the data. Seven items on the Luo checklist failed to be met by more than 50% of published studies. Conclusions A wide variety of approaches, algorithms, statistical software, and validation strategies were employed in the application of machine learning methods to inform patient-provider decision making. There is a need to ensure that multiple machine learning approaches are used, the model selection strategy is clearly defined, and both internal and external validation are necessary to be sure that decisions for patient care are being made with the highest quality evidence. Future work should routinely employ ensemble methods incorporating multiple machine learning algorithms.


2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. e100251
Author(s):  
Ian Scott ◽  
Stacey Carter ◽  
Enrico Coiera

Machine learning algorithms are being used to screen and diagnose disease, prognosticate and predict therapeutic responses. Hundreds of new algorithms are being developed, but whether they improve clinical decision making and patient outcomes remains uncertain. If clinicians are to use algorithms, they need to be reassured that key issues relating to their validity, utility, feasibility, safety and ethical use have been addressed. We propose a checklist of 10 questions that clinicians can ask of those advocating for the use of a particular algorithm, but which do not expect clinicians, as non-experts, to demonstrate mastery over what can be highly complex statistical and computational concepts. The questions are: (1) What is the purpose and context of the algorithm? (2) How good were the data used to train the algorithm? (3) Were there sufficient data to train the algorithm? (4) How well does the algorithm perform? (5) Is the algorithm transferable to new clinical settings? (6) Are the outputs of the algorithm clinically intelligible? (7) How will this algorithm fit into and complement current workflows? (8) Has use of the algorithm been shown to improve patient care and outcomes? (9) Could the algorithm cause patient harm? and (10) Does use of the algorithm raise ethical, legal or social concerns? We provide examples where an algorithm may raise concerns and apply the checklist to a recent review of diagnostic imaging applications. This checklist aims to assist clinicians in assessing algorithm readiness for routine care and identify situations where further refinement and evaluation is required prior to large-scale use.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document