Combining Machine Learning With Real-World Data to Identify Gaps in Clinical Practice Guidelines: Feasibility Study Using the Prospective German Stroke Registry and the National Acute Ischemic Stroke Guidelines
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) serve as essential tools for guiding clinicians in providing appropriate patient care. However, clinical practice does not always reflect CPGs. This is particularly critical in acute diseases requiring immediate treatment, such as acute ischemic stroke, one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Adherence to CPGs improves patient outcomes, yet guidelines may not address all patient scenarios, resulting in variability in treatment decisions. Identifying such gaps would augment CPGs but is challenging when using traditional methods. Objective: This study aims to leverage real-world data coupled with machine learning (ML) techniques to systematically identify and quantify gaps in German thrombolysis-in-stroke guidelines. Methods: We analyzed observational data from the German Stroke Registry - Endovascular Treatment (GSR-ET), a prospective national registry involving 18,069 patients from 25 stroke centers in whom endovascular treatment of a large vessel occlusion was attempted between 2015 and 2023. Key variables included demographic, clinical and imaging information, treatment details, and outcomes. A random forest model was used to predict intravenous thrombolysis treatment decisions based on three different sets of features: (1) guideline-recommended features, (2) clinician-selected features, and (3) features as documented in the GSR-ET before thrombolytic treatment. Feature importance scores, permutation importance, and Shapley Additive Explanations values were used, with clinician guidance, to interpret the model and identify key factors associated with guideline deviations and independent clinician judgments. Results: Of all GSR-ET patients, 13,440 (74.4%) were analyzed after excluding those with incomplete or implausible data. The random forest model's performance, measured by area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, was 0.71 (95% CI 0.68-0.73), 0.74 (95% CI 0.73-0.75), and 0.77 (95% CI 0.76-0.78) for the guideline-recommended, clinician-selected, and GSR-ET feature sets, respectively. Across all sets, time from symptom onset to admission was the most important predictor of thrombolysis treatment decisions. Age, which according to the German guidelines is not to be considered for thrombolysis administration, emerged as a significant predictor in the GSR-ET feature set, suggesting a potential gap between guidelines and clinical practice. Conclusions: In our study, we introduce an innovative approach that combines real-world data with ML techniques to identify discrepancies between CPGs and actual clinical decision-making. Using intravenous thrombolysis in large vessel occlusion stroke as a model, our findings suggest that treatment decisions may be influenced by factors not explicitly included in the current German guideline, such as patient age and pre-stroke functional status. This approach may help uncover clinically relevant variables for potential inclusion in future guideline refinements.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,042 | 0,105 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».