MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398769767 · doi:10.2196/54872

Development and Validation of an Explainable Machine Learning Model for Predicting Myocardial Injury After Noncardiac Surgery in Two Centers in China: Retrospective Study

2024· article· en· W4398769767 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chang Liu, Kai Zhang, Xiaodong Yang, Bingbing Meng, Jingsheng Lou, Yanhong Liu, Jiangbei Cao, Ke‐Xuan Liu, Weidong Mi, Hao Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaBeijing Nova Program
KeywordsPreprintChinaMedicineCardiac surgeryInternal medicineComputer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS) is an easily overlooked complication but closely related to postoperative cardiovascular adverse outcomes; therefore, the early diagnosis and prediction are particularly important. Objective: We aimed to develop and validate an explainable machine learning (ML) model for predicting MINS among older patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Methods: The retrospective cohort study included older patients who had noncardiac surgery from 1 northern center and 1 southern center in China. The data sets from center 1 were divided into a training set and an internal validation set. The data set from center 2 was used as an external validation set. Before modeling, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and recursive feature elimination methods were used to reduce dimensions of data and select key features from all variables. Prediction models were developed based on the extracted features using several ML algorithms, including category boosting, random forest, logistic regression, naïve Bayes, light gradient boosting machine, extreme gradient boosting, support vector machine, and decision tree. Prediction performance was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve as the main evaluation metric to select the best algorithms. The model performance was verified by internal and external validation data sets with the best algorithm and compared to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index. The Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) method was applied to calculate values for each feature, representing the contribution to the predicted risk of complication, and generate personalized explanations. Results: A total of 19,463 eligible patients were included; among those, 12,464 patients in center 1 were included as the training set; 4754 patients in center 1 were included as the internal validation set; and 2245 in center 2 were included as the external validation set. The best-performing model for prediction was the CatBoost algorithm, achieving the highest AUROC of 0.805 (95% CI 0.778-0.831) in the training set, validating with an AUROC of 0.780 in the internal validation set and 0.70 in external validation set. Additionally, CatBoost demonstrated superior performance compared to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (AUROC 0.636; P<.001). The SHAP values indicated the ranking of the level of importance of each variable, with preoperative serum creatinine concentration, red blood cell distribution width, and age accounting for the top three. The results from the SHAP method can predict events with positive values or nonevents with negative values, providing an explicit explanation of individualized risk predictions. Conclusions: The ML models can provide a personalized and fairly accurate risk prediction of MINS, and the explainable perspective can help identify potentially modifiable sources of risk at the patient level.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207