机器学习对苯海拉明暴露预后预测的价值:对美国5万名患者的全国分析。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Omid Mehrpour, Farhad Saeedi, Jafar Abdollahi, Alireza Amirabadizadeh, Foster Goss
{"title":"机器学习对苯海拉明暴露预后预测的价值:对美国5万名患者的全国分析。","authors":"Omid Mehrpour,&nbsp;Farhad Saeedi,&nbsp;Jafar Abdollahi,&nbsp;Alireza Amirabadizadeh,&nbsp;Foster Goss","doi":"10.4103/jrms.jrms_602_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diphenhydramine (DPH) is an antihistamine medication that in overdose can result in anticholinergic symptoms and serious complications, including arrhythmia and coma. We aimed to compare the value of various machine learning (ML) models, including light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), logistic regression (LR), and random forest (RF), in the outcome prediction of DPH poisoning.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We used the National Poison Data System database and included all of the human exposures of DPH from January 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017, and excluded those cases with missing information, duplicated cases, and those who reported co-ingestion. Data were split into training and test datasets, and three ML models were compared. We developed confusion matrices for each, and standard performance metrics were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our study population included 53,761 patients with DPH exposure. The most common reasons for exposure, outcome, chronicity of exposure, and formulation were captured. Our results showed that the average precision-recall area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84. LGBM and RF had the highest performance (average AUC of 0.91), followed by LR (average AUC of 0.90). The specificity of the models was 87.0% in the testing groups. The precision of models was 75.0%. Recall (sensitivity) of models ranged between 73% and 75% with an F1 score of 75.0%. The overall accuracy of LGBM, LR, and RF models in the test dataset was 74.8%, 74.0%, and 75.1%, respectively. In total, just 1.1% of patients (mostly those with major outcomes) received physostigmine.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates the application of ML in the prediction of DPH poisoning.</p>","PeriodicalId":50062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","volume":"28 ","pages":"49"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0a/ef/JRMS-28-49.PMC10366979.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of machine learning for prognosis prediction of diphenhydramine exposure: National analysis of 50,000 patients in the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Omid Mehrpour,&nbsp;Farhad Saeedi,&nbsp;Jafar Abdollahi,&nbsp;Alireza Amirabadizadeh,&nbsp;Foster Goss\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jrms.jrms_602_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diphenhydramine (DPH) is an antihistamine medication that in overdose can result in anticholinergic symptoms and serious complications, including arrhythmia and coma. We aimed to compare the value of various machine learning (ML) models, including light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), logistic regression (LR), and random forest (RF), in the outcome prediction of DPH poisoning.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We used the National Poison Data System database and included all of the human exposures of DPH from January 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017, and excluded those cases with missing information, duplicated cases, and those who reported co-ingestion. Data were split into training and test datasets, and three ML models were compared. We developed confusion matrices for each, and standard performance metrics were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our study population included 53,761 patients with DPH exposure. The most common reasons for exposure, outcome, chronicity of exposure, and formulation were captured. Our results showed that the average precision-recall area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84. LGBM and RF had the highest performance (average AUC of 0.91), followed by LR (average AUC of 0.90). The specificity of the models was 87.0% in the testing groups. The precision of models was 75.0%. Recall (sensitivity) of models ranged between 73% and 75% with an F1 score of 75.0%. The overall accuracy of LGBM, LR, and RF models in the test dataset was 74.8%, 74.0%, and 75.1%, respectively. In total, just 1.1% of patients (mostly those with major outcomes) received physostigmine.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates the application of ML in the prediction of DPH poisoning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50062,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"28 \",\"pages\":\"49\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0a/ef/JRMS-28-49.PMC10366979.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_602_22\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_602_22","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:苯海拉明(DPH)是一种抗组胺药物,过量可导致抗胆碱能症状和严重并发症,包括心律失常和昏迷。我们的目的是比较各种机器学习(ML)模型的价值,包括光梯度增强机(LGBM),逻辑回归(LR)和随机森林(RF),在DPH中毒的结果预测中。材料和方法:我们使用国家毒物数据系统数据库,纳入了2017年1月1日至2017年12月31日期间所有人类接触DPH的病例,排除了信息缺失、重复病例和报告共摄入的病例。将数据分为训练数据集和测试数据集,并对三种ML模型进行比较。我们为每个项目开发了混淆矩阵,并计算了标准性能指标。结果:我们的研究人群包括53,761例DPH暴露患者。捕获了暴露的最常见原因、结果、暴露的慢性性和配方。结果表明,平均曲线下查全面积(AUC)为0.84。LGBM和RF的生产性能最高(平均AUC为0.91),其次是LR(平均AUC为0.90)。各实验组模型的特异性为87.0%。模型精度为75.0%。模型的召回(灵敏度)范围在73% ~ 75%之间,F1得分为75.0%。LGBM、LR和RF模型在测试数据集中的总体准确率分别为74.8%、74.0%和75.1%。总的来说,只有1.1%的患者(主要是那些有重大结果的患者)接受了菲斯的明。结论:我们的研究证明了ML在预测DPH中毒中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The value of machine learning for prognosis prediction of diphenhydramine exposure: National analysis of 50,000 patients in the United States.

The value of machine learning for prognosis prediction of diphenhydramine exposure: National analysis of 50,000 patients in the United States.

The value of machine learning for prognosis prediction of diphenhydramine exposure: National analysis of 50,000 patients in the United States.

Background: Diphenhydramine (DPH) is an antihistamine medication that in overdose can result in anticholinergic symptoms and serious complications, including arrhythmia and coma. We aimed to compare the value of various machine learning (ML) models, including light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), logistic regression (LR), and random forest (RF), in the outcome prediction of DPH poisoning.

Materials and methods: We used the National Poison Data System database and included all of the human exposures of DPH from January 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017, and excluded those cases with missing information, duplicated cases, and those who reported co-ingestion. Data were split into training and test datasets, and three ML models were compared. We developed confusion matrices for each, and standard performance metrics were calculated.

Results: Our study population included 53,761 patients with DPH exposure. The most common reasons for exposure, outcome, chronicity of exposure, and formulation were captured. Our results showed that the average precision-recall area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84. LGBM and RF had the highest performance (average AUC of 0.91), followed by LR (average AUC of 0.90). The specificity of the models was 87.0% in the testing groups. The precision of models was 75.0%. Recall (sensitivity) of models ranged between 73% and 75% with an F1 score of 75.0%. The overall accuracy of LGBM, LR, and RF models in the test dataset was 74.8%, 74.0%, and 75.1%, respectively. In total, just 1.1% of patients (mostly those with major outcomes) received physostigmine.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrates the application of ML in the prediction of DPH poisoning.

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
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
75
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, a publication of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, is a peer-reviewed online continuous journal with print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.jmsjournal.net. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository.
×
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