Development and Validation of Machine Learning Models to Optimize Imaging and Referrals for Dizziness in the Emergency Department.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Danielle Carole Roy, David Savage, Saswata Deb, Salimur Choudhury, Robert Ohle
{"title":"Development and Validation of Machine Learning Models to Optimize Imaging and Referrals for Dizziness in the Emergency Department.","authors":"Danielle Carole Roy, David Savage, Saswata Deb, Salimur Choudhury, Robert Ohle","doi":"10.1111/acem.70369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dizziness and vertigo are common emergency department (ED) presentations, but only 2%-5% receive a serious diagnosis, such as stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Due to the lack of reliable validated prediction tools, many undergo unnecessary imaging and consultations, highlighting the need for improved risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop machine learning (ML) models that predict serious diagnoses in ED patients presenting with dizziness or vertigo.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter cohort study included 6637 ED patients with dizziness, vertigo, or imbalance from September 2014-December 2022. The primary outcome was a serious diagnosis-stroke, TIA, vertebral artery dissection, or brain tumor-within 30 days, adjudicated by a blinded committee. Data were split 80/20 into training and test sets. Four ML models (decision tree, LASSO logistic regression, random forest, XGBoost) were trained on 17 variables using 5-fold cross-validation and evaluated alongside the Sudbury Vertigo Risk score. Performance was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) and diagnostic accuracy measures. Computed tomography (CT) and referral rates were hypothetically compared pre- and post-model application.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 6637 patients (mean age 78.1; 57.8% female), 3.3% had a serious diagnosis. All ML models demonstrated strong discrimination, with AUCs ranging from 0.92 to 0.97. At a 5% predicted probability threshold, sensitivities ranged from 53%-97% and specificities from 84% to 96%. Logistic regression with LASSO demonstrated a favorable balance between discrimination (AUC: 0.97, sensitivity: 97% and specificity: 91%), although confidence intervals overlapped substantially across models. In a hypothetical model-based analysis, ML-guided classification corresponded to projected reductions in CT utilization and referrals ranging from 53%-85% and 11%-73%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Select ML models demonstrated discrimination comparable to the Sudbury Vertigo Risk Score while potentially improving specificity and reducing projected resource utilization. These tools show promise, but external validation is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":7105,"journal":{"name":"Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":"33 7","pages":"e70369"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.70369","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dizziness and vertigo are common emergency department (ED) presentations, but only 2%-5% receive a serious diagnosis, such as stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Due to the lack of reliable validated prediction tools, many undergo unnecessary imaging and consultations, highlighting the need for improved risk stratification.

Objective: To develop machine learning (ML) models that predict serious diagnoses in ED patients presenting with dizziness or vertigo.

Methods: This multicenter cohort study included 6637 ED patients with dizziness, vertigo, or imbalance from September 2014-December 2022. The primary outcome was a serious diagnosis-stroke, TIA, vertebral artery dissection, or brain tumor-within 30 days, adjudicated by a blinded committee. Data were split 80/20 into training and test sets. Four ML models (decision tree, LASSO logistic regression, random forest, XGBoost) were trained on 17 variables using 5-fold cross-validation and evaluated alongside the Sudbury Vertigo Risk score. Performance was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) and diagnostic accuracy measures. Computed tomography (CT) and referral rates were hypothetically compared pre- and post-model application.

Results: Among 6637 patients (mean age 78.1; 57.8% female), 3.3% had a serious diagnosis. All ML models demonstrated strong discrimination, with AUCs ranging from 0.92 to 0.97. At a 5% predicted probability threshold, sensitivities ranged from 53%-97% and specificities from 84% to 96%. Logistic regression with LASSO demonstrated a favorable balance between discrimination (AUC: 0.97, sensitivity: 97% and specificity: 91%), although confidence intervals overlapped substantially across models. In a hypothetical model-based analysis, ML-guided classification corresponded to projected reductions in CT utilization and referrals ranging from 53%-85% and 11%-73%, respectively.

Conclusions: Select ML models demonstrated discrimination comparable to the Sudbury Vertigo Risk Score while potentially improving specificity and reducing projected resource utilization. These tools show promise, but external validation is needed.

机器学习模型的开发和验证,以优化急诊科头晕的成像和转诊。
背景:头晕和眩晕是常见的急诊科(ED)表现,但只有2%-5%的患者得到严重的诊断,如中风或短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)。由于缺乏可靠的有效预测工具,许多人进行了不必要的成像和咨询,强调了改进风险分层的必要性。目的:建立机器学习(ML)模型,预测以头晕或眩晕为表现的ED患者的严重诊断。方法:本多中心队列研究纳入了2014年9月至2022年12月期间6637例出现头晕、眩晕或失衡的ED患者。主要结果是30天内的严重诊断——中风、TIA、椎动脉夹层或脑肿瘤,由一个盲法委员会裁决。数据按80/20分成训练集和测试集。四个ML模型(决策树,LASSO逻辑回归,随机森林,XGBoost)使用5倍交叉验证在17个变量上进行训练,并与Sudbury眩晕风险评分一起进行评估。使用曲线下面积(AUC)和诊断准确性测量来评估性能。计算机断层扫描(CT)和转诊率进行了假设比较前后模型应用。结果:6637例患者(平均年龄78.1岁,女性57.8%)中,重度诊断3.3%。所有ML模型都表现出很强的区分性,auc范围在0.92到0.97之间。在5%的预测概率阈值下,敏感性范围为53%-97%,特异性范围为84% - 96%。使用LASSO进行的逻辑回归显示,尽管不同模型的置信区间有很大的重叠,但判别之间的平衡是有利的(AUC: 0.97,灵敏度:97%,特异性:91%)。在假设的基于模型的分析中,ml引导的分类对应于CT利用率和转诊率的预期降低,分别为53%-85%和11%-73%。结论:所选择的ML模型显示出与Sudbury眩晕风险评分相当的歧视,同时可能提高特异性并降低预期的资源利用率。这些工具显示了希望,但需要外部验证。
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
Academic Emergency Medicine
Academic Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) is the official monthly publication of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and publishes information relevant to the practice, educational advancements, and investigation of emergency medicine. It is the second-largest peer-reviewed scientific journal in the specialty of emergency medicine. The goal of AEM is to advance the science, education, and clinical practice of emergency medicine, to serve as a voice for the academic emergency medicine community, and to promote SAEM''s goals and objectives. Members and non-members worldwide depend on this journal for translational medicine relevant to emergency medicine, as well as for clinical news, case studies and more. Each issue contains information relevant to the research, educational advancements, and practice in emergency medicine. Subject matter is diverse, including preclinical studies, clinical topics, health policy, and educational methods. The research of SAEM members contributes significantly to the scientific content and development of 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书