Background: Machine learning (ML) methods are increasingly used in addition to conventional statistical modelling (CSM) for predicting readmission and mortality in patients with myocardial infarction (MI). However, the two approaches have not been systematically compared across studies of prognosis in patients with MI. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed the literature via Medline, EPub, Cochrane Central, Embase, Inspec, ACM Digital Library, and Web of Science. Eligible studies included primary research articles published from January 2000 to March 2020, comparing ML and CSM for prognostication after MI. Results: Of 7,348 articles, 112 underwent full-text review, with the final set composed of 24 articles representing 374,365 patients. ML methods included artificial neural networks (n = 12 studies), random forests (n = 11), decision trees (n = 8), support vector machines (n = 8), and Bayesian techniques (n = 7). CSM included logistic regression (n = 19 studies), existing CSM-derived risk scores (n = 12), and Cox regression (n = 2). Thirteen of 19 studies examining mortality reported higher C-indexes with the use of ML compared with CSM. One study examined readmissions at 2 different time points, with C-indexes that were higher for ML than CSM. Across all studies, a total of 29 comparisons were performed, but the majority (n = 26, 90%) found small (< 0.05) absolute differences in the C-index between ML and CSM. With the use of a modified CHARMS checklist, sources of bias were identifiable in the majority of studies, and only 2 were externally validated. Conclusion: Although ML algorithms tended to have higher C-indexes than CSM for predicting death or readmission after MI, these studies exhibited threats to internal validity and were often unvalidated. Further comparisons are needed, with adherence to clinical quality standards for prognosis research. (Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42019134896)

Cho, S., Austin, P., Ross, H., Abdel-Qadir, H., Chicco, D., Tomlinson, G., et al. (2021). Machine Learning Compared With Conventional Statistical Models for Predicting Myocardial Infarction Readmission and Mortality: A Systematic Review. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 37(8), 1207-1214 [10.1016/j.cjca.2021.02.020].

Machine Learning Compared With Conventional Statistical Models for Predicting Myocardial Infarction Readmission and Mortality: A Systematic Review

Chicco D.;
2021

Abstract

Background: Machine learning (ML) methods are increasingly used in addition to conventional statistical modelling (CSM) for predicting readmission and mortality in patients with myocardial infarction (MI). However, the two approaches have not been systematically compared across studies of prognosis in patients with MI. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed the literature via Medline, EPub, Cochrane Central, Embase, Inspec, ACM Digital Library, and Web of Science. Eligible studies included primary research articles published from January 2000 to March 2020, comparing ML and CSM for prognostication after MI. Results: Of 7,348 articles, 112 underwent full-text review, with the final set composed of 24 articles representing 374,365 patients. ML methods included artificial neural networks (n = 12 studies), random forests (n = 11), decision trees (n = 8), support vector machines (n = 8), and Bayesian techniques (n = 7). CSM included logistic regression (n = 19 studies), existing CSM-derived risk scores (n = 12), and Cox regression (n = 2). Thirteen of 19 studies examining mortality reported higher C-indexes with the use of ML compared with CSM. One study examined readmissions at 2 different time points, with C-indexes that were higher for ML than CSM. Across all studies, a total of 29 comparisons were performed, but the majority (n = 26, 90%) found small (< 0.05) absolute differences in the C-index between ML and CSM. With the use of a modified CHARMS checklist, sources of bias were identifiable in the majority of studies, and only 2 were externally validated. Conclusion: Although ML algorithms tended to have higher C-indexes than CSM for predicting death or readmission after MI, these studies exhibited threats to internal validity and were often unvalidated. Further comparisons are needed, with adherence to clinical quality standards for prognosis research. (Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42019134896)
Articolo in rivista - Review Essay
Humans; Machine Learning; Models, Statistical; Myocardial Infarction; Patient Readmission
English
2021
37
8
1207
1214
reserved
Cho, S., Austin, P., Ross, H., Abdel-Qadir, H., Chicco, D., Tomlinson, G., et al. (2021). Machine Learning Compared With Conventional Statistical Models for Predicting Myocardial Infarction Readmission and Mortality: A Systematic Review. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 37(8), 1207-1214 [10.1016/j.cjca.2021.02.020].
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Cho-2021-Canadian J Cardiol-VoR.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Descrizione: Clinical research
Tipologia di allegato: Publisher’s Version (Version of Record, VoR)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione 725.08 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
725.08 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/431159
Citazioni
  • Scopus 28
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 27
Social impact