Cargando…
Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients
OBJECTIVE: To compare machine learning methods for predicting inpatient seizures risk and determine the feasibility of 1‐h screening EEG to identify low‐risk patients (<5% seizures risk in 48 h). METHODS: The Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium (CCEMRC) multicenter database contains...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6649418/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31353866 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acn3.50817 |
_version_ | 1783438030200111104 |
---|---|
author | Struck, Aaron F. Rodriguez‐Ruiz, Andres A. Osman, Gamaledin Gilmore, Emily J. Haider, Hiba A. Dhakar, Monica B. Schrettner, Matthew Lee, Jong W. Gaspard, Nicolas Hirsch, Lawrence J. Westover, M. Brandon |
author_facet | Struck, Aaron F. Rodriguez‐Ruiz, Andres A. Osman, Gamaledin Gilmore, Emily J. Haider, Hiba A. Dhakar, Monica B. Schrettner, Matthew Lee, Jong W. Gaspard, Nicolas Hirsch, Lawrence J. Westover, M. Brandon |
author_sort | Struck, Aaron F. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare machine learning methods for predicting inpatient seizures risk and determine the feasibility of 1‐h screening EEG to identify low‐risk patients (<5% seizures risk in 48 h). METHODS: The Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium (CCEMRC) multicenter database contains 7716 continuous EEGs (cEEG). Neural networks (NN), elastic net logistic regression (EN), and sparse linear integer model (RiskSLIM) were trained to predict seizures. RiskSLIM was used previously to generate 2HELPS2B model of seizure predictions. Data were divided into training (60% for model fitting) and evaluation (40% for model evaluation) cohorts. Performance was measured using area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), mean risk calibration (CAL), and negative predictive value (NPV). A secondary analysis was performed using Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) to normalize all EEG recordings to 48 h and use only the first hour of EEG as a “screening EEG” to generate predictions. RESULTS: RiskSLIM recreated the 2HELPS2B model. All models had comparable AUC: evaluation cohort (NN: 0.85, EN: 0.84, 2HELPS2B: 0.83) and MCS (NN: 0.82, EN; 0.82, 2HELPS2B: 0.81) and NPV (absence of seizures in the group that the models predicted to be low risk): evaluation cohort (NN: 97%, EN: 97%, 2HELPS2B: 97%) and MCS (NN: 97%, EN: 99%, 2HELPS2B: 97%). 2HELPS2B model was able to identify the largest proportion of low‐risk patients. INTERPRETATION: For seizure risk stratification of hospitalized patients, the RiskSLIM generated 2HELPS2B model compares favorably to the complex NN and EN generated models. 2HELPS2B is able to accurately and quickly identify low‐risk patients with only a 1‐h screening EEG. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6649418 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66494182019-07-31 Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients Struck, Aaron F. Rodriguez‐Ruiz, Andres A. Osman, Gamaledin Gilmore, Emily J. Haider, Hiba A. Dhakar, Monica B. Schrettner, Matthew Lee, Jong W. Gaspard, Nicolas Hirsch, Lawrence J. Westover, M. Brandon Ann Clin Transl Neurol Research Articles OBJECTIVE: To compare machine learning methods for predicting inpatient seizures risk and determine the feasibility of 1‐h screening EEG to identify low‐risk patients (<5% seizures risk in 48 h). METHODS: The Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium (CCEMRC) multicenter database contains 7716 continuous EEGs (cEEG). Neural networks (NN), elastic net logistic regression (EN), and sparse linear integer model (RiskSLIM) were trained to predict seizures. RiskSLIM was used previously to generate 2HELPS2B model of seizure predictions. Data were divided into training (60% for model fitting) and evaluation (40% for model evaluation) cohorts. Performance was measured using area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), mean risk calibration (CAL), and negative predictive value (NPV). A secondary analysis was performed using Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) to normalize all EEG recordings to 48 h and use only the first hour of EEG as a “screening EEG” to generate predictions. RESULTS: RiskSLIM recreated the 2HELPS2B model. All models had comparable AUC: evaluation cohort (NN: 0.85, EN: 0.84, 2HELPS2B: 0.83) and MCS (NN: 0.82, EN; 0.82, 2HELPS2B: 0.81) and NPV (absence of seizures in the group that the models predicted to be low risk): evaluation cohort (NN: 97%, EN: 97%, 2HELPS2B: 97%) and MCS (NN: 97%, EN: 99%, 2HELPS2B: 97%). 2HELPS2B model was able to identify the largest proportion of low‐risk patients. INTERPRETATION: For seizure risk stratification of hospitalized patients, the RiskSLIM generated 2HELPS2B model compares favorably to the complex NN and EN generated models. 2HELPS2B is able to accurately and quickly identify low‐risk patients with only a 1‐h screening EEG. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6649418/ /pubmed/31353866 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acn3.50817 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc on behalf of American Neurological Association. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Struck, Aaron F. Rodriguez‐Ruiz, Andres A. Osman, Gamaledin Gilmore, Emily J. Haider, Hiba A. Dhakar, Monica B. Schrettner, Matthew Lee, Jong W. Gaspard, Nicolas Hirsch, Lawrence J. Westover, M. Brandon Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients |
title | Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients |
title_full | Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients |
title_fullStr | Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients |
title_short | Comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients |
title_sort | comparison of machine learning models for seizure prediction in hospitalized patients |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6649418/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31353866 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acn3.50817 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT struckaaronf comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT rodriguezruizandresa comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT osmangamaledin comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT gilmoreemilyj comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT haiderhibaa comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT dhakarmonicab comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT schrettnermatthew comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT leejongw comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT gaspardnicolas comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT hirschlawrencej comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT westovermbrandon comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients AT comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforseizurepredictioninhospitalizedpatients |