Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Which supervised machine learning algorithm can best predict achievement of minimum clinically important difference in neck pain after surgery in patients with cervical myelopathy? A QOD study
26
Zitationen
27
Autoren
2023
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of different supervised machine learning algorithms to predict achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in neck pain after surgery in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database CSM cohort. The data set was divided into an 80% training and a 20% test set. Various supervised learning algorithms (including logistic regression, support vector machine, decision tree, random forest, extra trees, gaussian naïve Bayes, k-nearest neighbors, multilayer perceptron, and extreme gradient boosted trees) were evaluated on their performance to predict achievement of MCID in neck pain at 3 and 24 months after surgery, given a set of predicting baseline features. Model performance was assessed with accuracy, F1 score, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, precision, recall/sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: In total, 535 patients (46.9%) achieved MCID for neck pain at 3 months and 569 patients (49.9%) achieved it at 24 months. In each follow-up cohort, 501 patients (93.6%) were satisfied at 3 months after surgery and 569 patients (100%) were satisfied at 24 months after surgery. Of the supervised machine learning algorithms tested, logistic regression demonstrated the best accuracy (3 months: 0.76 ± 0.031, 24 months: 0.773 ± 0.044), followed by F1 score (3 months: 0.759 ± 0.019, 24 months: 0.777 ± 0.039) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (3 months: 0.762 ± 0.027, 24 months: 0.773 ± 0.043) at predicting achievement of MCID for neck pain at both follow-up time points, with fair performance. The best precision was also demonstrated by logistic regression at 3 (0.724 ± 0.058) and 24 (0.780 ± 0.097) months. The best recall/sensitivity was demonstrated by multilayer perceptron at 3 months (0.841 ± 0.094) and by extra trees at 24 months (0.817 ± 0.115). Highest specificity was shown by support vector machine at 3 months (0.952 ± 0.013) and by logistic regression at 24 months (0.747 ± 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate selection of models for studies should be based on the strengths of each model and the aims of the studies. For maximally predicting true achievement of MCID in neck pain, of all the predictions in this balanced data set the appropriate metric for the authors' study was precision. For both short- and long-term follow-ups, logistic regression demonstrated the highest precision of all models tested. Logistic regression performed consistently the best of all models tested and remains a powerful model for clinical classification tasks.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Magnetic Resonance Classification of Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
2001 · 3.936 Zit.
Wegener Granulomatosis: An Analysis of 158 Patients
1992 · 2.866 Zit.
Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the cervical spine in asymptomatic subjects. A prospective investigation.
1990 · 2.480 Zit.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Lumbar Spine in People without Back Pain
1994 · 2.397 Zit.
The value of postural reduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia
1969 · 2.283 Zit.
Autoren
- Christine Park
- Praveen V. Mummaneni
- Oren N. Gottfried
- Christopher I. Shaffrey
- A T'Ang
- Erica F. Bisson
- Anthony L. Asher
- Domagoj Coric
- Eric A. Potts
- Kevin T. Foley
- Michael Y. Wang
- Kai-Ming Fu
- Michael S. Virk
- John J. Knightly
- Scott A. Meyer
- Paul Park
- Cheerag D. Upadhyaya
- Mark E. Shaffrey
- Avery L. Buchholz
- Luis M. Tumialán
- Jay D. Turner
- Brandon A. Sherrod
- Nitin Agarwal
- Dean Chou
- Regis W. Haid
- Mohamad Bydon
- Andrew K. Chan
Institutionen
- Duke University(US)
- University of California, San Francisco(US)
- Columbia University(US)
- Neurological Surgery(US)
- University of Utah(US)
- Carolinas Healthcare System(US)
- Carolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates(US)
- Indiana Spine Group(US)
- Semmes Murphey Foundation(US)
- University of Tennessee at Knoxville(US)
- University of Miami(US)
- Cornell University(US)
- University of Michigan(US)
- Saint Luke's Health System(US)
- University of Virginia(US)
- Barrow Neurological Institute(US)
- Washington University in St. Louis(US)
- Mayo Clinic(US)