Hospital mortality prediction in traumatic injuries patients: comparing different SMOTE-based machine learning algorithms

BACKGROUND: Trauma is one of the most critical public health issues worldwide, leading to death and disability and influencing all age groups. Therefore, there is great interest in models for predicting mortality in trauma patients admitted to the ICU. The main objective of the present study is to develop and evaluate SMOTE-based machine-learning tools for predicting hospital mortality in trauma patients with imbalanced data. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted on 126 trauma patients admitted to an intensive care unit at Besat hospital in Hamadan Province, western Iran, from March 2020 to March 2021. Data were extracted from the medical information records of patients. According to the imbalanced property of the data, SMOTE techniques, namely SMOTE, Borderline-SMOTE1, Borderline-SMOTE2, SMOTE-NC, and SVM-SMOTE, were used for primary preprocessing. Then, the Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), Naive Bayes (NB), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) methods were used to predict patients' hospital mortality with traumatic injuries. The performance of the methods used was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, Positive Predictive Value (PPV), Negative Predictive Value (NPV), accuracy, Area Under the Curve (AUC), Geometric Mean (G-means), F1 score, and P-value of McNemar's test. RESULTS: Of the 126 patients admitted to an ICU, 117 (92.9%) survived and 9 (7.1%) died. The mean follow-up time from the date of trauma to the date of outcome was 3.98 ± 4.65 days. The performance of ML algorithms is not good with imbalanced data, whereas the performance of SMOTE-based ML algorithms is significantly improved. The mean area under the ROC curve (AUC) of all SMOTE-based models was more than 91%. F1-score and G-means before balancing the dataset were below 70% for all ML models except ANN. In contrast, F1-score and G-means for the balanced datasets reached more than 90% for all SMOTE-based models. Among all SMOTE-based ML methods, RF and ANN based on SMOTE and XGBoost based on SMOTE-NC achieved the highest value for all evaluation criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that SMOTE-based ML algorithms better predict outcomes in traumatic injuries than ML algorithms. They have the potential to assist ICU physicians in making clinical decisions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-023-01920-w.