Comparison of Two Methods, Gradient Boosting and Extreme Gradient Boosting to Pre- dict Survival in Covid-19 Data

Q4 Medicine
Nadiasadat Taghavi Razavizadeh, Maryam Salari, Mostafa Jafari, Ehsan Sabaghian, Vahid Ghavami
{"title":"Comparison of Two Methods, Gradient Boosting and Extreme Gradient Boosting to Pre- dict Survival in Covid-19 Data","authors":"Nadiasadat Taghavi Razavizadeh, Maryam Salari, Mostafa Jafari, Ehsan Sabaghian, Vahid Ghavami","doi":"10.18502/jbe.v9i3.15450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The present study discusses the importance of having a predictive method to determine the prognosis of patients with diseases like Covid-19. This method can assist physicians in making treatment decisions that improve survival rates and avoid unnecessary treatments. This research also highlights the importance of calibration, which is often overlooked in model evaluation. Without proper calibration, incorrect decisions can be made in disease treatment and preventive care. Therefore, the current study compares two highly accurate machine learning algorithms, Gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting, not only in terms of prediction accuracy but also in terms of model calibration and speed. \nMethods: This study involved analyzing data from Covid-19 patients who were admitted to two hospitals in Mashhad city, Razavi Khorasan province, over a span of 18 months. The k-fold cross-validation method was employed on the training dataset (K=5) to conduct the study. The accuracy and calibration of two methods (Gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting) in predicting survival were compared using the Concordance Index and calibration. \nResults: The Concordance Index values obtained for gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting models were 0.734 and 0.736, in the imbalanced and In the balanced data, the Concordance Index values were 0.893 for gradient boosting and 0.894 for Extreme gradient boosting. The surv.calib_beta index, the gradient boosting model had an estimated value of 0.59 in the imbalanced data and 0.66 in the balanced data. The Extreme gradient boosting model had an estimated value of 0.86 in the balanced data and 0.853 in the imbalanced data. The Extreme gradient boosting model was faster in the learning process compared to the gradient boosting model. \nConclusion: The Gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting models exhibited similar prediction accuracy and discrimination power, but the Extreme gradient boosting model demonstrated relatively good calibration compare to Gradient boosting model.","PeriodicalId":34310,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biostatistics and Epidemiology","volume":" 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biostatistics and Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jbe.v9i3.15450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The present study discusses the importance of having a predictive method to determine the prognosis of patients with diseases like Covid-19. This method can assist physicians in making treatment decisions that improve survival rates and avoid unnecessary treatments. This research also highlights the importance of calibration, which is often overlooked in model evaluation. Without proper calibration, incorrect decisions can be made in disease treatment and preventive care. Therefore, the current study compares two highly accurate machine learning algorithms, Gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting, not only in terms of prediction accuracy but also in terms of model calibration and speed. Methods: This study involved analyzing data from Covid-19 patients who were admitted to two hospitals in Mashhad city, Razavi Khorasan province, over a span of 18 months. The k-fold cross-validation method was employed on the training dataset (K=5) to conduct the study. The accuracy and calibration of two methods (Gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting) in predicting survival were compared using the Concordance Index and calibration. Results: The Concordance Index values obtained for gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting models were 0.734 and 0.736, in the imbalanced and In the balanced data, the Concordance Index values were 0.893 for gradient boosting and 0.894 for Extreme gradient boosting. The surv.calib_beta index, the gradient boosting model had an estimated value of 0.59 in the imbalanced data and 0.66 in the balanced data. The Extreme gradient boosting model had an estimated value of 0.86 in the balanced data and 0.853 in the imbalanced data. The Extreme gradient boosting model was faster in the learning process compared to the gradient boosting model. Conclusion: The Gradient boosting and Extreme gradient boosting models exhibited similar prediction accuracy and discrimination power, but the Extreme gradient boosting model demonstrated relatively good calibration compare to Gradient boosting model.
梯度提升和极端梯度提升两种方法在 Covid-19 数据中预判生存率的比较
导言本研究讨论了采用预测方法确定 Covid-19 等疾病患者预后的重要性。这种方法可以帮助医生做出治疗决定,提高存活率,避免不必要的治疗。这项研究还强调了校准的重要性,这在模型评估中经常被忽视。如果没有适当的校准,就可能在疾病治疗和预防保健方面做出错误的决定。因此,本研究比较了两种高精度机器学习算法--梯度提升算法和极梯度提升算法--不仅在预测精度方面,而且在模型校准和速度方面。研究方法本研究分析了拉扎维呼罗珊省马什哈德市两家医院在 18 个月内收治的 Covid-19 患者的数据。在训练数据集(K=5)上采用了 k 倍交叉验证法进行研究。使用一致性指数和校准法比较了两种方法(梯度提升法和极端梯度提升法)在预测存活率方面的准确性和校准性。结果:在不平衡数据和平衡数据中,梯度提升模型和极端梯度提升模型的一致性指数分别为 0.734 和 0.736。在 surv.calib_beta 指数中,梯度提升模型在不平衡数据中的估计值为 0.59,在平衡数据中的估计值为 0.66。极端梯度提升模型在平衡数据中的估计值为 0.86,在不平衡数据中的估计值为 0.853。与梯度提升模型相比,极端梯度提升模型的学习过程更快。结论梯度提升模型和极梯度提升模型表现出相似的预测准确性和辨别力,但极梯度提升模型的校准效果比梯度提升模型好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信