MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Survival Prediction of Heart Failure Patients using Stacked Ensemble Machine Learning Algorithm

2021· article· en· W3196693015 on OpenAlexaff
S M Mehedi Zaman, Wasay Mahmood Qureshi, Md. Mohsin Sarker Raihan, Abdullah Bin Shams, Sharmin Sultana

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEnsemble learningAlgorithmMachine learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart failure (HF) is the leading cause of global death from chronic diseases. Data mining using machine learning (ML) converts massive volumes of raw data created by healthcare institutions into meaningful information that can aid in making predictions and crucial decisions. After an HF, collecting and analyzing follow-up data from patients is critical to monitor their health recovery. The aim of this study is to use ML and predict the survival possibility of patients after HF based on the follow-up data. Three supervised classifiers i.e., Random Forest (RF), XGBoost (XGB), and Decision Tree (DT) have been used in our study. Moreover, we proposed to design a supervised stacked ensemble learning model that can achieve a prediction accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score of 99.98%, 100%, 99.98%, and 99.98%, respectively. The ensemble structure has three base learners (DT, RF & XGB) and one meta learner (RF). The integration of multiple algorithms boosted the prediction performance, which is a significant improvement from the other contemporary studies. Our results demonstrate that Ensemble ML can be a powerful intervention tool to predict accurately, beforehand, the recovery status of a chronic HF patient and prevent potential fatalities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207