Compares RSF and Cox regression in predicting TB mortality, suggesting RSF enhances risk prediction accuracy.
Survival analysis is widely used to predict time-to-event outcomes, with the Cox regression model being a standard approach. However, machine learning methods such as Random Survival Forests (RSF) can capture complex, non-linear relationships that traditional models may miss. This study compared the predictive performance of RSF and Cox regression in modelling tuberculosis (TB) mortality. We conducted a retrospective study of TB patients treated at the East London Central Clinic in South Africa. Patient data included demographic, clinical, and treatment-related variables. Model performance was evaluated using five metrics (C-index, Brier Score, Integrated Brier Score, Integrated Absolute Error, and Integrated Squared Error) along with time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Variable importance was assessed to identify key predictors. The RSF model consistently outperformed the Cox model across all evaluation metrics. RSF achieved a higher integrated AUC (0.815 vs. 0.652) and lower prediction error (IBS = 0.235 vs. 0.261). Important predictors of mortality included age, sex, weight, and disease class, with RSF capturing their time-dependent effects more accurately. The cumulative case/dynamic control ROC curve showed the strongest predictive accuracy at 120 days (AUC = 0.856). RSF demonstrated superior predictive accuracy compared with Cox regression in modelling TB mortality. Its ability to account for non-linear and time-dependent effects makes it a potentially useful tool for improving risk prediction and guiding patient management in TB care. Not applicable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adeboye et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: