Incremental value of machine learning for risk prediction in tetralogy of Fallot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Machine learning (ML) can facilitate prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in repaired tetralogy of Fallot (rTOF). We sought to determine the incremental value of ML above expert clinical judgement for risk prediction in rTOF. METHODS: Adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) clinicians (≥10 years of experience) participated (one cardiac surgeon and four cardiologists (two paediatric and two adult cardiology trained) with expertise in heart failure (HF), electrophysiology, imaging and intervention). Clinicians identified 10 high-yield variables for 5-year MACE prediction (defined as a composite of mortality, resuscitated sudden death, sustained ventricular tachycardia and HF). Risk for MACE (low, moderate or high) was assigned by clinicians blinded to outcome for adults with rTOF identified from an institutional database (n=25 patient reviews conducted by five independent observers). A validated ML model identified 10 variables for risk prediction in the same population. RESULTS: Prediction by ML was similar to the aggregate score of all experts (area under the curve (AUC) 0.85 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.96) vs 0.92 (0.72 to 0.98), p=0.315). Experts with ≥20 years of experience had superior discriminative capacity compared with <20 years (AUC 0.98 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.99) vs 0.80 (0.56 to 0.93), p=0.027). In those with <20 years of experience, ML provided incremental value such that the combined (clinical+ML) AUC approached ≥20 years (AUC 0.85 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.95), p=0.055). CONCLUSIONS: Robust prediction of 5-year MACE in rTOF was achieved using either ML or a multidisciplinary team of ACHD experts. Risk prediction of some clinicians was enhanced by incorporation of ML suggesting that there may be incremental value for ML in select circumstances.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.091 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".