Using Machine Learning to Predict Outcomes Following Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) carries important perioperative risks. Outcome prediction tools may help guide clinical decision-making but remain limited. We developed machine learning algorithms that predict 1-year stroke or death following TFCAS. METHODS AND RESULTS: The VQI (Vascular Quality Initiative) database was used to identify patients who underwent TFCAS for carotid artery stenosis between 2005 and 2024. We identified 112 features from the index hospitalization (82 preoperative [demographic/clinical], 13 intraoperative [procedural], and 17 postoperative [in-hospital course/complications]). The primary outcome was 1-year postprocedural stroke or death. The data were divided into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Six machine learning models were trained using preoperative features with 10-fold cross-validation. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The algorithm with the best performance was further trained using intra- and postoperative features. Model robustness was assessed using calibration plots and Brier scores. Overall, 35 214 patients underwent TFCAS during the study period and 3257 (9.2%) developed 1-year stroke or death. The best preoperative prediction model was extreme gradient boosting, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.95). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.63-0.67). The extreme gradient boosting model maintained excellent performance at the intra- and postoperative stages, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.95) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99), respectively. Calibration plots showed good agreement between predicted/observed event probabilities with Brier scores of 0.11 (preoperative), 0.11 (intraoperative), and 0.09 (postoperative). CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning can accurately predict 1-year stroke or death following TFCAS, performing better than logistic regression.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".