Cargando…

Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE: Machine learning (ML) techniques have emerged as a promising tool to predict risk and make decisions in different medical domains. We aimed to compare the predictive performance of machine learning-based methods for 4-year risk of metabolic syndrome in adults with the previous model using l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Hui, Chen, Dandan, Shao, Jing, Zou, Ping, Cui, Nianqi, Tang, Leiwen, Wang, Xiyi, Wang, Dan, Wu, Jingjie, Ye, Zhihong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8543031/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34707419
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S328180
_version_ 1784589555900350464
author Zhang, Hui
Chen, Dandan
Shao, Jing
Zou, Ping
Cui, Nianqi
Tang, Leiwen
Wang, Xiyi
Wang, Dan
Wu, Jingjie
Ye, Zhihong
author_facet Zhang, Hui
Chen, Dandan
Shao, Jing
Zou, Ping
Cui, Nianqi
Tang, Leiwen
Wang, Xiyi
Wang, Dan
Wu, Jingjie
Ye, Zhihong
author_sort Zhang, Hui
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Machine learning (ML) techniques have emerged as a promising tool to predict risk and make decisions in different medical domains. We aimed to compare the predictive performance of machine learning-based methods for 4-year risk of metabolic syndrome in adults with the previous model using logistic regression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study that employed a temporal validation strategy. Three popular ML techniques were selected to build the prognostic models. These techniques were artificial neural networks, classification and regression tree, and support vector machine. The logistic regression algorithm and ML techniques used the same five predictors. Discrimination, calibration, Brier score, and decision curve analysis were compared for model performance. RESULTS: Discrimination was above 0.7 for all models except classification and regression tree model in internal validation, while the logistic regression model showed the highest discrimination in external validation (0.782) and the smallest discrimination differences. The logistic regression model had the best calibration performance, and ANN also showed satisfactory calibration in internal validation and external validation. For overall performance, logistic regression had the smallest Brier score differences in internal validation and external validation, and it also had the largest net benefit in external validation. CONCLUSION: Overall, this study indicated that the logistic regression model performed as well as the flexible ML-based prediction models at internal validation, while the logistic regression model had the best performance at external validation. For clinical use, when the performance of the logistic regression model is similar to ML-based prediction models, the simplest and more interpretable model should be chosen.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8543031
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85430312021-10-26 Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study Zhang, Hui Chen, Dandan Shao, Jing Zou, Ping Cui, Nianqi Tang, Leiwen Wang, Xiyi Wang, Dan Wu, Jingjie Ye, Zhihong Risk Manag Healthc Policy Original Research PURPOSE: Machine learning (ML) techniques have emerged as a promising tool to predict risk and make decisions in different medical domains. We aimed to compare the predictive performance of machine learning-based methods for 4-year risk of metabolic syndrome in adults with the previous model using logistic regression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study that employed a temporal validation strategy. Three popular ML techniques were selected to build the prognostic models. These techniques were artificial neural networks, classification and regression tree, and support vector machine. The logistic regression algorithm and ML techniques used the same five predictors. Discrimination, calibration, Brier score, and decision curve analysis were compared for model performance. RESULTS: Discrimination was above 0.7 for all models except classification and regression tree model in internal validation, while the logistic regression model showed the highest discrimination in external validation (0.782) and the smallest discrimination differences. The logistic regression model had the best calibration performance, and ANN also showed satisfactory calibration in internal validation and external validation. For overall performance, logistic regression had the smallest Brier score differences in internal validation and external validation, and it also had the largest net benefit in external validation. CONCLUSION: Overall, this study indicated that the logistic regression model performed as well as the flexible ML-based prediction models at internal validation, while the logistic regression model had the best performance at external validation. For clinical use, when the performance of the logistic regression model is similar to ML-based prediction models, the simplest and more interpretable model should be chosen. Dove 2021-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8543031/ /pubmed/34707419 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S328180 Text en © 2021 Zhang et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Zhang, Hui
Chen, Dandan
Shao, Jing
Zou, Ping
Cui, Nianqi
Tang, Leiwen
Wang, Xiyi
Wang, Dan
Wu, Jingjie
Ye, Zhihong
Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_fullStr Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full_unstemmed Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_short Machine Learning-Based Prediction for 4-Year Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study
title_sort machine learning-based prediction for 4-year risk of metabolic syndrome in adults: a retrospective cohort study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8543031/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34707419
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S328180
work_keys_str_mv AT zhanghui machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT chendandan machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT shaojing machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT zouping machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT cuinianqi machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT tangleiwen machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT wangxiyi machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT wangdan machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT wujingjie machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT yezhihong machinelearningbasedpredictionfor4yearriskofmetabolicsyndromeinadultsaretrospectivecohortstudy