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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pourahmad, Saeedeh, Rasouli-Emadi, Soheila, Moayyedi, Fatemeh, Khalili, Hosseinali
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