Cargando…
Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine
BACKGROUND: Large amounts of information have called for increased computational complexity. Data dimension reduction is therefore critical to preliminary analysis. In this research, four variable selection (VS) methods are compared to obtain the important variables in predicting the prognosis of tr...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6906917/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31850086 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jrms.JRMS_89_18 |
_version_ | 1783478449465196544 |
---|---|
author | Pourahmad, Saeedeh Rasouli-Emadi, Soheila Moayyedi, Fatemeh Khalili, Hosseinali |
author_facet | Pourahmad, Saeedeh Rasouli-Emadi, Soheila Moayyedi, Fatemeh Khalili, Hosseinali |
author_sort | Pourahmad, Saeedeh |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Large amounts of information have called for increased computational complexity. Data dimension reduction is therefore critical to preliminary analysis. In this research, four variable selection (VS) methods are compared to obtain the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective follow-up study, 741 TBI patients who were hospitalized for at least 2 days and had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of at least one were followed. Their clinical data recorded during intensive care unit (ICU) admission and eight-category extended GOS conditions 6 months after discharge were utilized here. Two filter- and two wrapper-based VS methods were applied for comparison. A support vector machine (SVM) classifier was then used, and the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and the area under the receiver characteristic curve (AUC) values were calculated. RESULTS: Theoretically, the variables selected by sequential forward selection (SFS) method would better predict the prognosis (AUC = 0.737, 95% confidence interval [0.701, 0.772], specificity = 89.2%, sensitivity = 58.9% and accuracy = 79.1%) than the others. Genetic algorithm (GA), minimum redundancy maximum relevance (MRMR), and mutual information method were in the next orders, respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of an SVM classifier on optimal subsets given by GA and SFS reveals that wrapper-based methods perform better than filter-based methods in our data set, although all selected subsets, except for the MRMR, were clinically accepted. In addition, for prognosis prediction of TBI patients, a small subset of clinical records during ICU admission is enough to achieve an accepted accuracy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6906917 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69069172019-12-17 Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine Pourahmad, Saeedeh Rasouli-Emadi, Soheila Moayyedi, Fatemeh Khalili, Hosseinali J Res Med Sci Original Article BACKGROUND: Large amounts of information have called for increased computational complexity. Data dimension reduction is therefore critical to preliminary analysis. In this research, four variable selection (VS) methods are compared to obtain the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective follow-up study, 741 TBI patients who were hospitalized for at least 2 days and had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of at least one were followed. Their clinical data recorded during intensive care unit (ICU) admission and eight-category extended GOS conditions 6 months after discharge were utilized here. Two filter- and two wrapper-based VS methods were applied for comparison. A support vector machine (SVM) classifier was then used, and the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and the area under the receiver characteristic curve (AUC) values were calculated. RESULTS: Theoretically, the variables selected by sequential forward selection (SFS) method would better predict the prognosis (AUC = 0.737, 95% confidence interval [0.701, 0.772], specificity = 89.2%, sensitivity = 58.9% and accuracy = 79.1%) than the others. Genetic algorithm (GA), minimum redundancy maximum relevance (MRMR), and mutual information method were in the next orders, respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of an SVM classifier on optimal subsets given by GA and SFS reveals that wrapper-based methods perform better than filter-based methods in our data set, although all selected subsets, except for the MRMR, were clinically accepted. In addition, for prognosis prediction of TBI patients, a small subset of clinical records during ICU admission is enough to achieve an accepted accuracy. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6906917/ /pubmed/31850086 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jrms.JRMS_89_18 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Journal of Research in Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Pourahmad, Saeedeh Rasouli-Emadi, Soheila Moayyedi, Fatemeh Khalili, Hosseinali Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine |
title | Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine |
title_full | Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine |
title_fullStr | Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine |
title_short | Comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine |
title_sort | comparison of four variable selection methods to determine the important variables in predicting the prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients by support vector machine |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6906917/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31850086 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jrms.JRMS_89_18 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pourahmadsaeedeh comparisonoffourvariableselectionmethodstodeterminetheimportantvariablesinpredictingtheprognosisoftraumaticbraininjurypatientsbysupportvectormachine AT rasouliemadisoheila comparisonoffourvariableselectionmethodstodeterminetheimportantvariablesinpredictingtheprognosisoftraumaticbraininjurypatientsbysupportvectormachine AT moayyedifatemeh comparisonoffourvariableselectionmethodstodeterminetheimportantvariablesinpredictingtheprognosisoftraumaticbraininjurypatientsbysupportvectormachine AT khalilihosseinali comparisonoffourvariableselectionmethodstodeterminetheimportantvariablesinpredictingtheprognosisoftraumaticbraininjurypatientsbysupportvectormachine |