较低的基线评分最好地预测髋关节镜术后最小临床重要差异的实现:来自股髋臼撞击随机对照试验和嵌入前瞻性队列的机器学习分析。

IF 5
Prushoth Vivekanantha, Jeffrey Kay, Nicole Simunovic, Olufemi R Ayeni
{"title":"较低的基线评分最好地预测髋关节镜术后最小临床重要差异的实现:来自股髋臼撞击随机对照试验和嵌入前瞻性队列的机器学习分析。","authors":"Prushoth Vivekanantha, Jeffrey Kay, Nicole Simunovic, Olufemi R Ayeni","doi":"10.1002/ksa.70053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This analysis evaluated whether logistic regression and machine learning models could predict achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) at 6 and 12 months following hip arthroscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the multicenter Femoroacetabular Impingement RandomiSed controlled Trial and its embedded prospective cohort were used. A total of 309 patients (mean ± SD age 34.0 ± 8.7 years, 37.7% female) were included. The MCID thresholds for iHOT-12 and HOS were calculated using a distribution-based method and were 9.0 and 13.0, respectively. Predictive models were trained with demographic, radiographic, and intraoperative variables using a 70:30 training-to-test data split. MCID achievement was defined as a change from preoperative to postoperative scores that surpassed the calculated threshold. Model discrimination was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), and calibration was evaluated via slope, intercept, and Brier scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Achievement rates were 83.3% at 6 months and 81.1% at 12 months for iHOT-12, and 64.3% at 6 months and 75% at 12 months for HOS. Logistic regression performed best at 12 months (AUC = 0.724) for iHOT-12 with poor calibration (slope = 2.19). AUCs for HOS ranged between 0.672-0.715 at 6 months and 0.665-0.699 at 12 months. Best calibration was achieved by Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (slope = 1.270, intercept = -0.177) at 6 months and by logistic regression at 12 months (slope = 1.093, intercept = -0.079). Lower baseline patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were associated with MCID achievement in most models.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The most robust predictor of MCID achievement for both PROMs were lower baseline scores, and can be used as a prognostic variable for preoperative counselling. Model performance for predicting MCID was superior for HOS relative to iHOT-12. Machine learning models generally had comparable discrimination and calibration scores to traditional logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":520702,"journal":{"name":"Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lower baseline scores best predict achievement of the minimal clinically important difference after hip arthroscopy: A machine learning analysis from the Femoroacetabular Impingement RandomiSed Controlled Trial and embedded prospective cohort.\",\"authors\":\"Prushoth Vivekanantha, Jeffrey Kay, Nicole Simunovic, Olufemi R Ayeni\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ksa.70053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This analysis evaluated whether logistic regression and machine learning models could predict achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) at 6 and 12 months following hip arthroscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the multicenter Femoroacetabular Impingement RandomiSed controlled Trial and its embedded prospective cohort were used. A total of 309 patients (mean ± SD age 34.0 ± 8.7 years, 37.7% female) were included. The MCID thresholds for iHOT-12 and HOS were calculated using a distribution-based method and were 9.0 and 13.0, respectively. Predictive models were trained with demographic, radiographic, and intraoperative variables using a 70:30 training-to-test data split. MCID achievement was defined as a change from preoperative to postoperative scores that surpassed the calculated threshold. Model discrimination was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), and calibration was evaluated via slope, intercept, and Brier scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Achievement rates were 83.3% at 6 months and 81.1% at 12 months for iHOT-12, and 64.3% at 6 months and 75% at 12 months for HOS. Logistic regression performed best at 12 months (AUC = 0.724) for iHOT-12 with poor calibration (slope = 2.19). AUCs for HOS ranged between 0.672-0.715 at 6 months and 0.665-0.699 at 12 months. Best calibration was achieved by Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (slope = 1.270, intercept = -0.177) at 6 months and by logistic regression at 12 months (slope = 1.093, intercept = -0.079). Lower baseline patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were associated with MCID achievement in most models.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The most robust predictor of MCID achievement for both PROMs were lower baseline scores, and can be used as a prognostic variable for preoperative counselling. Model performance for predicting MCID was superior for HOS relative to iHOT-12. Machine learning models generally had comparable discrimination and calibration scores to traditional logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520702,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ksa.70053\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ksa.70053","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

目的:本分析评估了逻辑回归和机器学习模型是否可以预测国际髋关节结果工具(iHOT-12)和髋关节结果评分(HOS)在髋关节镜检查后6个月和12个月的最小临床重要差异(MCID)的实现。方法:采用多中心股髋臼撞击随机对照试验及其嵌入前瞻性队列的数据。共纳入309例患者(平均±SD年龄34.0±8.7岁,女性37.7%)。采用基于分布的方法计算iHOT-12和HOS的MCID阈值,分别为9.0和13.0。预测模型采用人口统计学、放射学和术中变量进行训练,训练与测试数据比例为70:30。MCID成就定义为术前到术后评分的变化超过计算阈值。使用曲线下面积(AUC)评估模型判别,通过斜率、截距和Brier评分评估模型校准。结果:iHOT-12组6个月和12个月的成功率分别为83.3%和81.1%;HOS组6个月和12个月的成功率分别为64.3%和75%。对于标度较差(斜率= 2.19)的iHOT-12, Logistic回归在12个月时表现最佳(AUC = 0.724)。居屋的auc介乎6个月时的0.672-0.715及12个月时的0.665-0.699。6个月时通过最小绝对收缩和选择算子(斜率= 1.270,截距= -0.177)和12个月时通过逻辑回归(斜率= 1.093,截距= -0.079)获得最佳校准。在大多数模型中,较低的基线患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)与MCID的实现相关。结论:较低的基线评分是两种PROMs患者MCID成就的最可靠预测指标,可作为术前咨询的预后变量。HOS预测MCID的模型性能优于iHOT-12。机器学习模型通常具有与传统逻辑回归模型相当的判别和校准分数。证据等级:三级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lower baseline scores best predict achievement of the minimal clinically important difference after hip arthroscopy: A machine learning analysis from the Femoroacetabular Impingement RandomiSed Controlled Trial and embedded prospective cohort.

Purpose: This analysis evaluated whether logistic regression and machine learning models could predict achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) at 6 and 12 months following hip arthroscopy.

Methods: Data from the multicenter Femoroacetabular Impingement RandomiSed controlled Trial and its embedded prospective cohort were used. A total of 309 patients (mean ± SD age 34.0 ± 8.7 years, 37.7% female) were included. The MCID thresholds for iHOT-12 and HOS were calculated using a distribution-based method and were 9.0 and 13.0, respectively. Predictive models were trained with demographic, radiographic, and intraoperative variables using a 70:30 training-to-test data split. MCID achievement was defined as a change from preoperative to postoperative scores that surpassed the calculated threshold. Model discrimination was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), and calibration was evaluated via slope, intercept, and Brier scores.

Results: Achievement rates were 83.3% at 6 months and 81.1% at 12 months for iHOT-12, and 64.3% at 6 months and 75% at 12 months for HOS. Logistic regression performed best at 12 months (AUC = 0.724) for iHOT-12 with poor calibration (slope = 2.19). AUCs for HOS ranged between 0.672-0.715 at 6 months and 0.665-0.699 at 12 months. Best calibration was achieved by Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (slope = 1.270, intercept = -0.177) at 6 months and by logistic regression at 12 months (slope = 1.093, intercept = -0.079). Lower baseline patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were associated with MCID achievement in most models.

Conclusion: The most robust predictor of MCID achievement for both PROMs were lower baseline scores, and can be used as a prognostic variable for preoperative counselling. Model performance for predicting MCID was superior for HOS relative to iHOT-12. Machine learning models generally had comparable discrimination and calibration scores to traditional logistic regression models.

Level of evidence: Level III.

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:604180095
Book学术官方微信