Why the study?
Does a neural network model improve the prediction of perioperative cardiac complications compared to logistic regression in vascular surgery patients?
Does a neural network model improve the prediction of perioperative cardiac complications compared to logistic regression in vascular surgery patients?
Neural networks provide better calibration than logistic regression for predicting perioperative cardiac risk in vascular surgery patients, avoiding the overestimation of risk in high-risk groups.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May improve calibration of perioperative cardiac risk estimates; extends modeling comparisons but should not yet change practice.
Neural networks were developed to predict perioperative cardiac complications with data from 567 vascular surgery patients. Neural network scores were based on cardiac risk factors and dipyridamole thallium results. These scores were converted into likelihood ratios that predicted cardiac risk. The prognostic accuracy of the neural networks was similar to that of logistic regression models (ROC areas 76.0% vs 75.8%), but their calibration was better. Logistic regression overestimated event rates in a group of high-risk patients (predicted event rate, 64%; observed rate 30%; n=50, p<0.001). On a validation set of 514 patients, the neural networks still had ROC similar areas to those of logistic regression (68.3% vs 67.5%), but logistic regression again overestimated event rates for a group of high-risk patients. The calibration difference was reflected in the Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square statistic (18.6 for the neural networks, 45.0 for logistic regression). The neural networks successfully estimated perioperative cardiac risk with better calibration than comparable logistic regression models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lapuerta et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: