Author:
Fridgeirsson Egill A.,Sontag David,Rijnbeek Peter
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Deep learning models have had a lot of success in various fields. However, on structured data they have struggled. Here we apply four state-of-the-art supervised deep learning models using the attention mechanism and compare against logistic regression and XGBoost using discrimination, calibration and clinical utility.
Methods
We develop the models using a general practitioners database. We implement a recurrent neural network, a transformer with and without reverse distillation and a graph neural network. We measure discrimination using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC). We assess smooth calibration using restricted cubic splines and clinical utility with decision curve analysis.
Results
Our results show that deep learning approaches can improve discrimination up to 2.5% points AUC and 7.4% points AUPRC. However, on average the baselines are competitive. Most models are similarly calibrated as the baselines except for the graph neural network. The transformer using reverse distillation shows the best performance in clinical utility on two out of three prediction problems over most of the prediction thresholds.
Conclusion
In this study, we evaluated various approaches in supervised learning using neural networks and attention. Here we do a rigorous comparison, not only looking at discrimination but also calibration and clinical utility. There is value in using deep learning models on electronic health record data since it can improve discrimination and clinical utility while providing good calibration. However, good baseline methods are still competitive.
Funder
the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertak
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Informatics,Epidemiology
Reference36 articles.
1. Goldstein BA, Navar AM, Pencina MJ, Ioannidis JPA. Opportunities and challenges in developing risk prediction models with electronic health records data: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017;24(1):198–208.
2. Yang C, Kors JA, Ioannou S, John LH, Markus AF, Rekkas A et al. Trends in the conduct and reporting of clinical prediction model development and validation: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022.
3. Hripcsak G, Duke JD, Shah NH, Reich CG, Huser V, Schuemie MJ et al. Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI): Opportunities for Observational Researchers. In: Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 2015.
4. Ayaz M, Pasha MF, Alzahrani MY, Budiarto R, Stiawan D. The fast Health Interoperability resources (FHIR) Standard: Systematic Literature Review of Implementations, applications, challenges and opportunities. JMIR Med Inform. 2021;9(7):e21929.
5. Reps JM, Schuemie MJ, Suchard MA, Ryan PB, Rijnbeek PR. Design and implementation of a standardized framework to generate and evaluate patient-level prediction models using observational healthcare data. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(8):969–75.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献