脊椎大手术后持续使用阿片类药物的高风险患者分类:机器学习方法

Sierra Simpson, William Zhong, Soraya Mehdipour, Michael Armaneous, Varshini Sathish, Natalie Walker, Engy T. Said, Rodney A. Gabriel
{"title":"脊椎大手术后持续使用阿片类药物的高风险患者分类:机器学习方法","authors":"Sierra Simpson, William Zhong, Soraya Mehdipour, Michael Armaneous, Varshini Sathish, Natalie Walker, Engy T. Said, Rodney A. Gabriel","doi":"10.1213/ane.0000000000006832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":" Five classification models were evaluated to predict persistent opioid use: logistic regression, random forest, neural network, balanced random forest, and balanced bagging. Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique was used to improve class balance. The primary outcome was persistent opioid use, defined as patient reporting to use opioids after 3 months postoperatively. The data were split into a training and test set. Performance metrics were evaluated on the test set and included the F1 score and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). Feature importance was ranked based on SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). RESULTS: After exclusion (patients with missing follow-up data), 2611 patients were included in the analysis, of which 1209 (46.3%) continued to use opioids 3 months after surgery. The balanced random forest classifiers had the highest AUC (0.877, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.834–0.894) compared to neural networks (0.729, 95% CI, 0.672–0.787), logistic regression (0.709, 95% CI, 0.652–0.767), balanced bagging classifier (0.859, 95% CI, 0.814–0.905), and random forest classifier (0.855, 95% CI, 0.813–0.897). The balanced random forest classifier had the highest F1 (0.758, 95% CI, 0.677–0.839). Furthermore, the specificity, sensitivity, precision, and accuracy were 0.883, 0.700, 0.836, and 0.780, respectively. The features based on SHAP analysis with the highest impact on model performance were age, preoperative opioid use, preoperative pain scores, and body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The balanced random forest classifier was found to be the most effective model for identifying persistent opioid use after spine surgery....","PeriodicalId":7799,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classifying High-Risk Patients for Persistent Opioid Use After Major Spine Surgery: A Machine-Learning Approach\",\"authors\":\"Sierra Simpson, William Zhong, Soraya Mehdipour, Michael Armaneous, Varshini Sathish, Natalie Walker, Engy T. Said, Rodney A. Gabriel\",\"doi\":\"10.1213/ane.0000000000006832\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\" Five classification models were evaluated to predict persistent opioid use: logistic regression, random forest, neural network, balanced random forest, and balanced bagging. Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique was used to improve class balance. The primary outcome was persistent opioid use, defined as patient reporting to use opioids after 3 months postoperatively. The data were split into a training and test set. Performance metrics were evaluated on the test set and included the F1 score and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). Feature importance was ranked based on SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). RESULTS: After exclusion (patients with missing follow-up data), 2611 patients were included in the analysis, of which 1209 (46.3%) continued to use opioids 3 months after surgery. The balanced random forest classifiers had the highest AUC (0.877, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.834–0.894) compared to neural networks (0.729, 95% CI, 0.672–0.787), logistic regression (0.709, 95% CI, 0.652–0.767), balanced bagging classifier (0.859, 95% CI, 0.814–0.905), and random forest classifier (0.855, 95% CI, 0.813–0.897). The balanced random forest classifier had the highest F1 (0.758, 95% CI, 0.677–0.839). Furthermore, the specificity, sensitivity, precision, and accuracy were 0.883, 0.700, 0.836, and 0.780, respectively. The features based on SHAP analysis with the highest impact on model performance were age, preoperative opioid use, preoperative pain scores, and body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The balanced random forest classifier was found to be the most effective model for identifying persistent opioid use after spine surgery....\",\"PeriodicalId\":7799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anesthesia & Analgesia\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anesthesia & Analgesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000006832\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000006832","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

评估了五种预测阿片类药物持续使用的分类模型:逻辑回归、随机森林、神经网络、平衡随机森林和平衡袋集。为了提高分类的平衡性,采用了合成少数群体过度取样技术(Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique)。主要结果是阿片类药物的持续使用,即患者报告术后 3 个月后仍在使用阿片类药物。数据分为训练集和测试集。性能指标在测试集上进行评估,包括 F1 分数和接收器工作特征曲线下面积 (AUC)。特征重要性根据 SHapley Additive exPlanations(SHAP)进行排序。结果:经排除(随访数据缺失的患者)后,2611 名患者被纳入分析,其中 1209 人(46.3%)在术后 3 个月仍在使用阿片类药物。与神经网络(0.729,95% CI,0.672-0.787)、逻辑回归(0.709,95% CI,0.652-0.767)、平衡随机森林分类器(0.859,95% CI,0.814-0.905)和随机森林分类器(0.855,95% CI,0.813-0.897)相比,平衡随机森林分类器的AUC最高(0.877,95% 置信区间[CI],0.834-0.894)。平衡随机森林分类器的 F1 值最高(0.758,95% CI,0.677-0.839)。此外,特异性、灵敏度、精确度和准确度分别为 0.883、0.700、0.836 和 0.780。根据 SHAP 分析,对模型性能影响最大的特征是年龄、术前阿片类药物使用情况、术前疼痛评分和体重指数。结论:平衡随机森林分类器是识别脊柱手术后持续使用阿片类药物的最有效模型....。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Classifying High-Risk Patients for Persistent Opioid Use After Major Spine Surgery: A Machine-Learning Approach
Five classification models were evaluated to predict persistent opioid use: logistic regression, random forest, neural network, balanced random forest, and balanced bagging. Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique was used to improve class balance. The primary outcome was persistent opioid use, defined as patient reporting to use opioids after 3 months postoperatively. The data were split into a training and test set. Performance metrics were evaluated on the test set and included the F1 score and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). Feature importance was ranked based on SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). RESULTS: After exclusion (patients with missing follow-up data), 2611 patients were included in the analysis, of which 1209 (46.3%) continued to use opioids 3 months after surgery. The balanced random forest classifiers had the highest AUC (0.877, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.834–0.894) compared to neural networks (0.729, 95% CI, 0.672–0.787), logistic regression (0.709, 95% CI, 0.652–0.767), balanced bagging classifier (0.859, 95% CI, 0.814–0.905), and random forest classifier (0.855, 95% CI, 0.813–0.897). The balanced random forest classifier had the highest F1 (0.758, 95% CI, 0.677–0.839). Furthermore, the specificity, sensitivity, precision, and accuracy were 0.883, 0.700, 0.836, and 0.780, respectively. The features based on SHAP analysis with the highest impact on model performance were age, preoperative opioid use, preoperative pain scores, and body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The balanced random forest classifier was found to be the most effective model for identifying persistent opioid use after spine surgery....
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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