These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of Radiomic Models Based on Different Machine Learning Methods for Predicting Intracerebral Hemorrhage Expansion.
    Author: Duan C, Liu F, Gao S, Zhao J, Niu L, Li N, Liu S, Wang G, Zhou X, Ren Y, Xu W, Liu X.
    Journal: Clin Neuroradiol; 2022 Mar; 32(1):215-223. PubMed ID: 34156513.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to predict hematoma expansion (HE) by radiomic models based on different machine learning methods and determine the best radiomic model through the comparison. METHOD: A total of 108 patients with intracerebral hemorrhage were retrospectively evaluated. Images of baseline non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) and follow-up NCCT scan within 24 h were retrospectively reviewed. An HE was defined as a volume increase of more than 33% or an increase greater than 12.5 mL from the volume of the baseline NCCT. Texture parameters of the baseline NCCT images were selected by the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. We used support vector machine (SVM), decision tree (DT), conditional inference trees (CIT), random forest (RF), k‑nearest neighbors (KNN), back-propagation neural network (BPNet) and Bayes to build models. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed and compared among models. RESULTS: Every model had a relatively high AUC (all > 0.75), SVM and KNN had the highest AUC of 0.91. There were significant differences between SVM and CIT (Z > 2.266, p = 0.02345), KNN and CIT (Z = 2.4834, p = 0.01301), RF and CIT (Z = 2.6956, p = 0.007027), KNN and BPNet (Z = 2.0122, p = 0.0442), RF and BPNet (Z = 1.9793, p = 0.04778). There was no significant difference among SVM, DT, RF, KNN and Bayes (p > 0.05). The SVM obtained the largest net benefit when the threshold probability was less than 0.33, while KNN obtained the largest net benefit when the threshold probability was greater than 0.33. Combined with ROC and DCA, SVM and KNN performed better in all the models for predicting HE. CONCLUSION: Radiomic models based on different machine learning methods can be used to predict HE and the models generated by SVM and KNN performed best.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]