Does machine learning improve prediction accuracy of the Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy Success Score? A contemporary Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network cohort study.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Armaan K Malhotra, Abhaya V Kulkarni, Leonard H Verhey, Ron W Reeder, Jay Riva-Cambrin, Hailey Jensen, Ian F Pollack, Michael McDowell, Brandon G Rocque, Mandeep S Tamber, Patrick J McDonald, Mark D Krieger, Jonathan A Pindrik, Albert M Isaacs, Jason S Hauptman, Samuel R Browd, William E Whitehead, Eric M Jackson, John C Wellons, Todd C Hankinson, Jason Chu, David D Limbrick, Jennifer M Strahle, John R W Kestle
{"title":"Does machine learning improve prediction accuracy of the Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy Success Score? A contemporary Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network cohort study.","authors":"Armaan K Malhotra, Abhaya V Kulkarni, Leonard H Verhey, Ron W Reeder, Jay Riva-Cambrin, Hailey Jensen, Ian F Pollack, Michael McDowell, Brandon G Rocque, Mandeep S Tamber, Patrick J McDonald, Mark D Krieger, Jonathan A Pindrik, Albert M Isaacs, Jason S Hauptman, Samuel R Browd, William E Whitehead, Eric M Jackson, John C Wellons, Todd C Hankinson, Jason Chu, David D Limbrick, Jennifer M Strahle, John R W Kestle","doi":"10.1007/s00381-024-06667-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network (HCRN) study had two aims: (1) to compare the predictive performance of the original ETV Success Score (ETVSS) using logistic regression modeling with other newer machine learning models and (2) to assess whether inclusion of imaging variables improves prediction performance using machine learning models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified children undergoing first-time ETV for hydrocephalus that were enrolled prospectively at HCRN sites between 200 and 2020. The primary outcome was ETV success 6 months after index surgery. The cohort was randomly divided into training (70%) and testing (30%) datasets. The classic ETVSS variables were used for logistic regression and machine learning models. Predictive performance of each model was evaluated on the testing dataset using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 752 patients that underwent first time ETV, of which 185 patients (24.6%) experienced ETV failure within 6 months. For aim 1, using the classic ETVSS variables, machine learning models did not outperform logistic regression with AUROC 0.60 (95% CI: 0.52-0.69) for Naïve Bayes (highest machine learning model performance) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.60-0.76) for logistic regression. After inclusion of imaging features (aim 2), machine learning model prediction improved but remained no better than the above logistic regression with the highest AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.59-0.75) attained using Naïve Bayes architecture compared to 0.68 (95% CI: 0.59-0.76) for logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This contemporary multicenter observational cohort study demonstrated that machine learning modeling strategies did not improve performance of the ETVSS model over logistic regression.</p>","PeriodicalId":9970,"journal":{"name":"Child's Nervous System","volume":"41 1","pages":"42"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child's Nervous System","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-024-06667-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network (HCRN) study had two aims: (1) to compare the predictive performance of the original ETV Success Score (ETVSS) using logistic regression modeling with other newer machine learning models and (2) to assess whether inclusion of imaging variables improves prediction performance using machine learning models.

Methods: We identified children undergoing first-time ETV for hydrocephalus that were enrolled prospectively at HCRN sites between 200 and 2020. The primary outcome was ETV success 6 months after index surgery. The cohort was randomly divided into training (70%) and testing (30%) datasets. The classic ETVSS variables were used for logistic regression and machine learning models. Predictive performance of each model was evaluated on the testing dataset using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).

Results: There were 752 patients that underwent first time ETV, of which 185 patients (24.6%) experienced ETV failure within 6 months. For aim 1, using the classic ETVSS variables, machine learning models did not outperform logistic regression with AUROC 0.60 (95% CI: 0.52-0.69) for Naïve Bayes (highest machine learning model performance) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.60-0.76) for logistic regression. After inclusion of imaging features (aim 2), machine learning model prediction improved but remained no better than the above logistic regression with the highest AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.59-0.75) attained using Naïve Bayes architecture compared to 0.68 (95% CI: 0.59-0.76) for logistic regression.

Conclusions: This contemporary multicenter observational cohort study demonstrated that machine learning modeling strategies did not improve performance of the ETVSS model over logistic regression.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Child's Nervous System
Child's Nervous System 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
322
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The journal has been expanded to encompass all aspects of pediatric neurosciences concerning the developmental and acquired abnormalities of the nervous system and its coverings, functional disorders, epilepsy, spasticity, basic and clinical neuro-oncology, rehabilitation and trauma. Global pediatric neurosurgery is an additional field of interest that will be considered for publication in the journal.
×
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