Key result
A gradient boosting machine model utilizing electronic medical record data accurately predicted 30-day mortality after invasive coronary treatment, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.99 in internal validation and 0.90 in external validation.
Why the study?
Robust prediction models fully utilizing electronic medical record data to identify patients at risk of adverse cardiac events following invasive coronary treatment are limited.
Does an EMR-based machine learning model accurately predict 30-day adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing invasive coronary treatment?
Observational (n=20,952)
Yes
Does an EMR-based machine learning model accurately predict 30-day adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing invasive coronary treatment?
Effect estimate: AUROC 0.99 (95% CI 0.97-0.99)
p-value: p=<0.001
An EMR-based machine learning model, particularly using a gradient boosting machine and dynamic time-series data, demonstrated high accuracy in predicting 30-day mortality and MACE after invasive coronary treatment.
ML models leveraging full EMR data achieved strong 30-day mortality prediction after PCI/CABG; leaves open prospective validation before clinical use.
BACKGROUND: Although there is a growing interest in prediction models based on electronic medical records (EMRs) to identify patients at risk of adverse cardiac events following invasive coronary treatment, robust models fully utilizing EMR data are limited. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models by using diverse fields of EMR to predict the risk of 30-day adverse cardiac events after percutaneous intervention or bypass surgery. METHODS: EMR data of 5,184,565 records of 16,793 patients at a quaternary hospital between 2006 and 2016 were categorized into static basic (eg, demographics), dynamic time-series (eg, laboratory values), and cardiac-specific data (eg, coronary angiography). The data were randomly split into training, tuning, and testing sets in a ratio of 3:1:1. Each model was evaluated with 5-fold cross-validation and with an external EMR-based cohort at a tertiary hospital. Logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), and feedforward neural network (FNN) algorithms were applied. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality following invasive treatment. RESULTS: GBM showed the best performance with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.99; RF had a similar AUROC of 0.98. AUROCs of FNN and LR were 0.96 and 0.93, respectively. GBM had the highest area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.80, and the AUPRCs of RF, LR, and FNN were 0.73, 0.68, and 0.63, respectively. All models showed low Brier scores of <0.1 as well as highly fitted calibration plots, indicating a good fit of the ML-based models. On external validation, the GBM model demonstrated maximal performance with an AUROC of 0.90, while FNN had an AUROC of 0.85. The AUROCs of LR and RF were slightly lower at 0.80 and 0.79, respectively. The AUPRCs of GBM, LR, and FNN were similar at 0.47, 0.43, and 0.41, respectively, while that of RF was lower at 0.33. Among the categories in the GBM model, time-series dynamic data demonstrated a high AUROC of >0.95, contributing majorly to the excellent results. CONCLUSIONS: Exploiting the diverse fields of the EMR data set, the ML-based 30-day adverse cardiac event prediction models demonstrated outstanding results, and the applied framework could be generalized for various health care prediction models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kwon et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Adverse cardiac events after invasive coronary treatment (PCI or CABG) (n=20,952). Gradient boosting machine (GBM) model vs. Logistic regression, random forest, and feedforward neural network models was evaluated on 30-day mortality (AUROC 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-0.99, p=<0.001). A gradient boosting machine model utilizing electronic medical record data accurately predicted 30-day mortality after invasive coronary treatment, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.99 in internal validation and 0.90 in external validation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: