MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366439428 · doi:10.1186/s12911-023-02169-5

Cardiovascular disease incidence prediction by machine learning and statistical techniques: a 16-year cohort study from eastern Mediterranean region

2023· article· en· W4366439428 on OpenAlexaff
Kamran Mehrabani-Zeinabad, Awat Feizi, Masoumeh Sadeghi, Hamidreza Roohafza, Mohammad Talaei, Nizal Sarrafzadegan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersIsfahan University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsIncidence (geometry)Health informaticsCohortDiseaseMediterranean climateMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeographyPublic healthInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the predominant cause of early death worldwide. Identification of people with a high risk of being affected by CVD is consequential in CVD prevention. This study adopts Machine Learning (ML) and statistical techniques to develop classification models for predicting the future occurrence of CVD events in a large sample of Iranians. METHODS: We used multiple prediction models and ML techniques with different abilities to analyze the large dataset of 5432 healthy people at the beginning of entrance into the Isfahan Cohort Study (ICS) (1990-2017). Bayesian additive regression trees enhanced with "missingness incorporated in attributes" (BARTm) was run on the dataset with 515 variables (336 variables without and the remaining with up to 90% missing values). In the other used classification algorithms, variables with more than 10% missing values were excluded, and MissForest imputes the missing values of the remaining 49 variables. We used Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) to select the most contributing variables. Random oversampling technique, recommended cut-point by precision-recall curve, and relevant evaluation metrics were used for handling unbalancing in the binary response variable. RESULTS: This study revealed that age, systolic blood pressure, fasting blood sugar, two-hour postprandial glucose, diabetes mellitus, history of heart disease, history of high blood pressure, and history of diabetes are the most contributing factors for predicting CVD incidence in the future. The main differences between the results of classification algorithms are due to the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity. Quadratic Discriminant Analysis (QDA) algorithm presents the highest accuracy (75.50 ± 0.08) but the minimum sensitivity (49.84 ± 0.25); In contrast, decision trees provide the lowest accuracy (51.95 ± 0.69) but the top sensitivity (82.52 ± 1.22). BARTm.90% resulted in 69.48 ± 0.28 accuracy and 54.00 ± 1.66 sensitivity without any preprocessing step. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that building a prediction model for CVD in each region is valuable for screening and primary prevention strategies in that specific region. Also, results showed that using conventional statistical models alongside ML algorithms makes it possible to take advantage of both techniques. Generally, QDA can accurately predict the future occurrence of CVD events with a fast (inference speed) and stable (confidence values) procedure. The combined ML and statistical algorithm of BARTm provide a flexible approach without any need for technical knowledge about assumptions and preprocessing steps of the prediction procedure.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.334 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision MakingSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207