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: Application of machine learning model in predicting the likelihood of blood transfusion after hip fracture surgery.
    Author: Chen X, Pan J, Li Y, Tang R.
    Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res; 2023 Nov; 35(11):2643-2656. PubMed ID: 37733228.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Anemia is one of the common adverse reactions after hip fracture surgery. The traditional method to solve anemia is allogeneic transfusion. However, the transfusion may lead to some complications such as septicemia and fever. So far, few studies have reported roles of machine learning in predicting whether blood transfusion is needed or not after hip fracture surgery. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop machine learning models to predict the likelihood of postoperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. METHODS: This study enrolled 1355 patients who underwent hip fracture surgery at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2016 to December 2021. Among all patients, 210 cases received postoperative blood transfusion. All patients were randomly divided into a training group and a testing group at a ratio of 7:3. In the training group, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine independent risk factors for the postoperative transfusion. Then, based on these independent risk factors, tenfold cross-validation method was utilized to develop five machine learning models, including logistic, multilayer perceptron (MLP), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, area under ROC curve (AUC), and Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) were generated to evaluate the performance of the models. Calibration plot and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to test the performance, stability, and clinical applicability of the models. The models were validated using the testing group; and the ROC curve, MCC, calibration plot, and DCA curves were also generated to validate the performance, stability, and clinical applicability of the models. To further verify the robustness of the model, we randomly grabbed 70% of the samples in the testing set, performed 1000 iterations, and calculated the AUC and confidence interval of the five models. Finally, we used SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to explain these models. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that there were 8 independent risk factors, including age, blood transfusion history, albumin (ALB), globulin (GLO), total bilirubin (TBIL), indirect bilirubin (IBIL), hemoglobin (HB), and blood loss > 200 ml. We finally selected five independent risk factors including HB, GLO, age, IBIL, and blood loss > 200 ml. Based on these five independent risk factors, we generated six characteristic variables, namely HB, HB × HB, HB × blood loss, GLO × HB, age, age × IBIL, and established five machine learning models using a tenfold cross-validation method. In the training group, the AUC values of logistic, RF, MLP, SVM, and XGB were 0.9320, 0.8911, 0.9327, 0.9225, and 0.8825, respectively, and the average AUC was 0.9122 ± 0.0212. The MCC values were 0.65, 0.77, 0.65, 0.66, and 0.68, respectively, and the calibration plot and DCA performed well. In the testing group the AUC values of logistic, RF, MLP, SVM, and XGB were 0.8483, 0.7978, 0.8576, 0.8598, and 0.8216, respectively. The average AUC was 0.8370 ± 0.0238, and the MCC values were 0.41, 0.35, 0.40, 0.41, and 0.41, respectively. The calibration plot and DCA in the testing group also showed good performance. The AUC values and confidence intervals of the 1000-iteration model were: logistic (AUC, min confidence interval [CI]-max confidence interval [CI] 0.848, 0.804-0.903), RF (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.797, 0.734-0.857), MLP (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.858, 0.812-0.902), SVM (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.859, 0.819-0.910), and XGB (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.821, 0.764-0.894). The model performed well. Finally, according to SHAP, among all five models, HB played the most important role in model prediction and interpretation. CONCLUSION: The five models we developed all performed well in predicting the likelihood of blood transfusion after hip fracture surgery. Therefore, we believed that the prediction model based on machine learning had great application prospects in clinical practice, which could help clinicians better predict the risk of blood transfusion after hip fracture surgery.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]