Fast and interpretable mortality risk scores for critical care patients.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Chloe Qinyu Zhu, Muhang Tian, Lesia Semenova, Jiachang Liu, Jack Xu, Joseph Scarpa, Cynthia Rudin
{"title":"Fast and interpretable mortality risk scores for critical care patients.","authors":"Chloe Qinyu Zhu, Muhang Tian, Lesia Semenova, Jiachang Liu, Jack Xu, Joseph Scarpa, Cynthia Rudin","doi":"10.1093/jamia/ocae318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Prediction of mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients typically relies on black box models (that are unacceptable for use in hospitals) or hand-tuned interpretable models (that might lead to the loss in performance). We aim to bridge the gap between these 2 categories by building on modern interpretable machine learning (ML) techniques to design interpretable mortality risk scores that are as accurate as black boxes.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>We developed a new algorithm, GroupFasterRisk, which has several important benefits: it uses both hard and soft direct sparsity regularization, it incorporates group sparsity to allow more cohesive models, it allows for monotonicity constraint to include domain knowledge, and it produces many equally good models, which allows domain experts to choose among them. For evaluation, we leveraged the largest existing public ICU monitoring datasets (MIMIC III and eICU).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Models produced by GroupFasterRisk outperformed OASIS and SAPS II scores and performed similarly to APACHE IV/IVa while using at most a third of the parameters. For patients with sepsis/septicemia, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and acute kidney failure, GroupFasterRisk models outperformed OASIS and SOFA. Finally, different mortality prediction ML approaches performed better based on variables selected by GroupFasterRisk as compared to OASIS variables.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Group Faster Risk's models performed better than risk scores currently used in hospitals, and on par with black box ML models, while being orders of magnitude sparser. Because GroupFasterRisk produces a variety of risk scores, it allows design flexibility-the key enabler of practical model creation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Group Faster Risk is a fast, accessible, and flexible procedure that allows learning a diverse set of sparse risk scores for mortality prediction.</p>","PeriodicalId":50016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocae318","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Prediction of mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients typically relies on black box models (that are unacceptable for use in hospitals) or hand-tuned interpretable models (that might lead to the loss in performance). We aim to bridge the gap between these 2 categories by building on modern interpretable machine learning (ML) techniques to design interpretable mortality risk scores that are as accurate as black boxes.

Material and methods: We developed a new algorithm, GroupFasterRisk, which has several important benefits: it uses both hard and soft direct sparsity regularization, it incorporates group sparsity to allow more cohesive models, it allows for monotonicity constraint to include domain knowledge, and it produces many equally good models, which allows domain experts to choose among them. For evaluation, we leveraged the largest existing public ICU monitoring datasets (MIMIC III and eICU).

Results: Models produced by GroupFasterRisk outperformed OASIS and SAPS II scores and performed similarly to APACHE IV/IVa while using at most a third of the parameters. For patients with sepsis/septicemia, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and acute kidney failure, GroupFasterRisk models outperformed OASIS and SOFA. Finally, different mortality prediction ML approaches performed better based on variables selected by GroupFasterRisk as compared to OASIS variables.

Discussion: Group Faster Risk's models performed better than risk scores currently used in hospitals, and on par with black box ML models, while being orders of magnitude sparser. Because GroupFasterRisk produces a variety of risk scores, it allows design flexibility-the key enabler of practical model creation.

Conclusion: Group Faster Risk is a fast, accessible, and flexible procedure that allows learning a diverse set of sparse risk scores for mortality prediction.

快速和可解释的危重病人死亡率风险评分。
目的:对重症监护病房(ICU)患者死亡率的预测通常依赖于黑盒模型(在医院使用是不可接受的)或手动调整的可解释模型(可能导致性能损失)。我们的目标是通过构建现代可解释机器学习(ML)技术来设计可解释的死亡率风险评分,从而弥合这两个类别之间的差距,该评分与黑箱一样准确。材料和方法:我们开发了一种新的算法GroupFasterRisk,它有几个重要的好处:它使用硬的和软的直接稀疏性正则化,它结合了组稀疏性以允许更多的内聚模型,它允许单调性约束包括领域知识,并且它产生了许多同样好的模型,这允许领域专家从中进行选择。为了进行评估,我们利用了现有最大的公共ICU监测数据集(MIMIC III和eICU)。结果:GroupFasterRisk生成的模型优于OASIS和SAPS II评分,并且在使用最多三分之一的参数时,表现与APACHE IV/IVa相似。对于脓毒症/败血症、急性心肌梗死、心力衰竭和急性肾衰竭患者,GroupFasterRisk模型优于OASIS和SOFA。最后,与OASIS变量相比,基于GroupFasterRisk选择的变量,不同的死亡率预测ML方法表现更好。讨论:Group Faster Risk的模型比目前医院使用的风险评分表现更好,与黑盒ML模型相当,同时具有数量级稀疏性。因为GroupFasterRisk产生了各种各样的风险评分,它允许设计灵活性——实际模型创建的关键推动者。结论:Group Faster Risk是一种快速、方便、灵活的方法,可以学习各种稀疏风险评分用于死亡率预测。
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
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 医学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
7.80%
发文量
230
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMIA is AMIA''s premier peer-reviewed journal for biomedical and health informatics. Covering the full spectrum of activities in the field, JAMIA includes informatics articles in the areas of clinical care, clinical research, translational science, implementation science, imaging, education, consumer health, public health, and policy. JAMIA''s articles describe innovative informatics research and systems that help to advance biomedical science and to promote health. Case reports, perspectives and reviews also help readers stay connected with the most important informatics developments in implementation, policy and education.
×
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