Comparative performance of logistic regression, multilayer perceptron and decision tree models for predicting surgical pressure injuries: a retrospective cohort study.

IF 4.4 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Chia-Yen Li, Chi-Ming Chu, Chao-Wen Chen, Hung-Yen Ke, Peng-Ching Hsiao, Hsueh-Hsing Pan
{"title":"Comparative performance of logistic regression, multilayer perceptron and decision tree models for predicting surgical pressure injuries: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Chia-Yen Li, Chi-Ming Chu, Chao-Wen Chen, Hung-Yen Ke, Peng-Ching Hsiao, Hsueh-Hsing Pan","doi":"10.1136/bmjhci-2025-101532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Surgical pressure injuries (SPIs) are a significant patient safety risk due to prolonged immobility and tissue hypoperfusion under general anaesthesia. Existing risk assessment tools lack real-time predictive capabilities. This study developed and validated a machine-learning model for SPI prediction and clinical integration.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This retrospective cohort study analysed electronic health records from 931 surgical inpatients under general anaesthesia between January 2016 and December 2021. SPI cases were identified using ICD-10 codes with 1:1 matching by medical specialty. Data preprocessing included imputation, normalisation and outlier removal. Logistic regression (LR), multilayer perceptron (MLP) and decision tree (DT) models were developed and validated via cross-validation. Model performance was assessed using area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, precision, recall and F1 score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant SPI predictors included the Charlson Comorbidity Index (p<0.001), number of medication types (p=0.001) and body mass index (p<0.001). The MLP outperformed LR (AUC=0.707) and DT (AUC=0.717), achieving the highest AUC (0.836), accuracy (0.773), precision (0.812), recall (0.688) and F1 score (0.745).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The MLP model effectively identified key SPI risk factors, outperforming LR and DT by capturing non-linear relationships. Its integration into clinical workflows may enhance perioperative risk management through early detection and targeted interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Machine learning integration can improve early SPI detection and personalised prevention. The MLP model demonstrated the highest potential for real-time SPI risk stratification. Future research should validate this model across diverse surgical populations and develop scalable strategies for clinical implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9050,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12458856/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2025-101532","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Surgical pressure injuries (SPIs) are a significant patient safety risk due to prolonged immobility and tissue hypoperfusion under general anaesthesia. Existing risk assessment tools lack real-time predictive capabilities. This study developed and validated a machine-learning model for SPI prediction and clinical integration.

Method: This retrospective cohort study analysed electronic health records from 931 surgical inpatients under general anaesthesia between January 2016 and December 2021. SPI cases were identified using ICD-10 codes with 1:1 matching by medical specialty. Data preprocessing included imputation, normalisation and outlier removal. Logistic regression (LR), multilayer perceptron (MLP) and decision tree (DT) models were developed and validated via cross-validation. Model performance was assessed using area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, precision, recall and F1 score.

Results: Significant SPI predictors included the Charlson Comorbidity Index (p<0.001), number of medication types (p=0.001) and body mass index (p<0.001). The MLP outperformed LR (AUC=0.707) and DT (AUC=0.717), achieving the highest AUC (0.836), accuracy (0.773), precision (0.812), recall (0.688) and F1 score (0.745).

Discussion: The MLP model effectively identified key SPI risk factors, outperforming LR and DT by capturing non-linear relationships. Its integration into clinical workflows may enhance perioperative risk management through early detection and targeted interventions.

Conclusion: Machine learning integration can improve early SPI detection and personalised prevention. The MLP model demonstrated the highest potential for real-time SPI risk stratification. Future research should validate this model across diverse surgical populations and develop scalable strategies for clinical implementation.

逻辑回归、多层感知器和决策树模型预测手术压力损伤的比较性能:一项回顾性队列研究。
目的:手术压力损伤(SPIs)是一个重大的患者安全风险,因为在全身麻醉下长时间的不活动和组织灌注不足。现有的风险评估工具缺乏实时预测能力。本研究开发并验证了用于SPI预测和临床整合的机器学习模型。方法:本回顾性队列研究分析了2016年1月至2021年12月931例全麻外科住院患者的电子健康记录。SPI病例采用ICD-10编码,按医学专业1:1匹配。数据预处理包括归一化、归一化和异常值去除。开发了逻辑回归(LR)、多层感知器(MLP)和决策树(DT)模型,并通过交叉验证进行了验证。采用曲线下面积(AUC)、准确率、精密度、召回率和F1评分来评估模型的性能。结果:重要的SPI预测因子包括Charlson共病指数(p)。讨论:MLP模型通过捕获非线性关系,有效识别了SPI的关键危险因素,优于LR和DT。将其纳入临床工作流程可以通过早期发现和有针对性的干预措施加强围手术期风险管理。结论:机器学习集成可以提高SPI的早期检测和个性化预防。MLP模型显示出实时SPI风险分层的最高潜力。未来的研究应该在不同的手术人群中验证这一模型,并为临床实施制定可扩展的策略。
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
6.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
18 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信