谁会多待一会儿?使用机器学习预测髋关节和膝关节置换术患者的住院时间

Benedikt Langenberger
{"title":"谁会多待一会儿?使用机器学习预测髋关节和膝关节置换术患者的住院时间","authors":"Benedikt Langenberger","doi":"10.1016/j.ibmed.2023.100111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Hospital length of stay (LoS) varies widely across hip (HA) and knee arthroplasty (KA) patients and depends on multiple factors. Prediction methods are necessary to improve hospital capacity planning and identify patients at risk of long LoS. This study aims (1) to compare the performance of previously applied machine learning (ML) as well as regression methods for either LoS classification or regression in a multi-hospital setting for primary HA and KA patients. In addition, the study aims (2a) to assess which variables are the most important predictors for LoS prediction and, specifically, (2b) whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected before surgery act as important predictors.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>2611 primary HA and 2077 primary KA patients from eight German hospitals were included to train and test extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), naïve Bayes (NB) and logistic regression (LogReg) for classification, and XGBoost as well as a linear regression (LinReg) for regression. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and mean absolute error (MAE) were used as primary performance indicators for classification and regression.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For classification, the highest AUC was reached by XGBoost and LogReg (AUC = 0.81) in the HA sample, whereas NB was statistically significantly outperformed by both other methods. In the KA sample, no statistical difference between any method was found, and AUC was lower for all models compared with HA. For regression, MAE was lowest for XGBoost (1.43 days for HA and 1.21 days for KA). PROMs and hospital indicators were among the most relevant predictors in all cases.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The study demonstrated robust performance of ML in predicting LoS. PROMs reflect relevant features for prediction. They should be routinely collected and used for practical applications. XGBoost may act as a superior prediction tool compared to regression or other ML models in certain circumstances.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73399,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence-based medicine","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who will stay a little longer? Predicting length of stay in hip and knee arthroplasty patients using machine learning\",\"authors\":\"Benedikt Langenberger\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ibmed.2023.100111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Hospital length of stay (LoS) varies widely across hip (HA) and knee arthroplasty (KA) patients and depends on multiple factors. Prediction methods are necessary to improve hospital capacity planning and identify patients at risk of long LoS. This study aims (1) to compare the performance of previously applied machine learning (ML) as well as regression methods for either LoS classification or regression in a multi-hospital setting for primary HA and KA patients. In addition, the study aims (2a) to assess which variables are the most important predictors for LoS prediction and, specifically, (2b) whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected before surgery act as important predictors.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>2611 primary HA and 2077 primary KA patients from eight German hospitals were included to train and test extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), naïve Bayes (NB) and logistic regression (LogReg) for classification, and XGBoost as well as a linear regression (LinReg) for regression. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and mean absolute error (MAE) were used as primary performance indicators for classification and regression.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For classification, the highest AUC was reached by XGBoost and LogReg (AUC = 0.81) in the HA sample, whereas NB was statistically significantly outperformed by both other methods. In the KA sample, no statistical difference between any method was found, and AUC was lower for all models compared with HA. For regression, MAE was lowest for XGBoost (1.43 days for HA and 1.21 days for KA). PROMs and hospital indicators were among the most relevant predictors in all cases.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The study demonstrated robust performance of ML in predicting LoS. PROMs reflect relevant features for prediction. They should be routinely collected and used for practical applications. XGBoost may act as a superior prediction tool compared to regression or other ML models in certain circumstances.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intelligence-based medicine\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intelligence-based medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266652122300025X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intelligence-based medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266652122300025X","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

背景髋关节(HA)和膝关节置换术(KA)患者的住院时间差异很大,取决于多种因素。预测方法对于改进医院容量规划和识别有长期LoS风险的患者是必要的。本研究旨在(1)比较先前应用的机器学习(ML)以及回归方法在多医院环境中对原发性HA和KA患者的LoS分类或回归的性能。此外,该研究旨在(2a)评估哪些变量是LoS预测的最重要预测因素,特别是(2b)手术前收集的患者报告的结果测量(PROM)是否是重要的预测因素。方法对来自德国8家医院的2611名原发性HA和2077名原发KA患者进行训练和测试,分别采用极限梯度增强(XGBoost)、朴素贝叶斯(NB)和逻辑回归(LogReg)进行分类,XGBoost和线性回归(LinReg)进行回归。受试者工作特性曲线下面积(AUC)和平均绝对误差(MAE)被用作分类和回归的主要性能指标。结果对于分类,XGBoost和LogReg在HA样本中达到了最高的AUC(AUC=0.81),而NB在统计学上显著优于其他两种方法。在KA样本中,没有发现任何方法之间的统计差异,并且与HA相比,所有模型的AUC都较低。对于回归,XGBoost的MAE最低(HA为1.43天,KA为1.21天)。胎膜早破和医院指标是所有病例中最相关的预测因素。结论该研究证明了ML在预测LoS方面的稳健性能。PROM反映了用于预测的相关特征。应定期收集并用于实际应用。在某些情况下,与回归或其他ML模型相比,XGBoost可能是一种优越的预测工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Who will stay a little longer? Predicting length of stay in hip and knee arthroplasty patients using machine learning

Background

Hospital length of stay (LoS) varies widely across hip (HA) and knee arthroplasty (KA) patients and depends on multiple factors. Prediction methods are necessary to improve hospital capacity planning and identify patients at risk of long LoS. This study aims (1) to compare the performance of previously applied machine learning (ML) as well as regression methods for either LoS classification or regression in a multi-hospital setting for primary HA and KA patients. In addition, the study aims (2a) to assess which variables are the most important predictors for LoS prediction and, specifically, (2b) whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected before surgery act as important predictors.

Methods

2611 primary HA and 2077 primary KA patients from eight German hospitals were included to train and test extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), naïve Bayes (NB) and logistic regression (LogReg) for classification, and XGBoost as well as a linear regression (LinReg) for regression. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and mean absolute error (MAE) were used as primary performance indicators for classification and regression.

Results

For classification, the highest AUC was reached by XGBoost and LogReg (AUC = 0.81) in the HA sample, whereas NB was statistically significantly outperformed by both other methods. In the KA sample, no statistical difference between any method was found, and AUC was lower for all models compared with HA. For regression, MAE was lowest for XGBoost (1.43 days for HA and 1.21 days for KA). PROMs and hospital indicators were among the most relevant predictors in all cases.

Conclusion

The study demonstrated robust performance of ML in predicting LoS. PROMs reflect relevant features for prediction. They should be routinely collected and used for practical applications. XGBoost may act as a superior prediction tool compared to regression or other ML models in certain circumstances.

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
Intelligence-based medicine
Intelligence-based medicine Health Informatics
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
187 days
×
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