Choi S C, Muizelaar J P, Barnes T Y, Marmarou A, Brooks D M, Young H F
Department of Biostatistics, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond.
J Neurosurg. 1991 Aug;75(2):251-5. doi: 10.3171/jns.1991.75.2.0251.
Prediction tree techniques are employed in the analysis of data from 555 patients admitted to the Medical College of Virginia hospitals with severe head injuries. Twenty-three prognostic indicators are examined to predict the distribution of 12-month outcomes among the five Glasgow Outcome Scale categories. A tree diagram, illustrating the prognostic pattern, provides critical threshold levels that split the patients into subgroups with varying degrees of risk. It is a visually useful way to look at the prognosis of head-injured patients. In previous analyses addressing this prediction problem, the same set of prognostic factors (age, motor score, and pupillary response) was used for all patients. These approaches might be considered inflexible because more informative prediction may be achieved by somewhat different combinations of factors for different patients. Tree analysis reveals that the pattern of important prognostic factors differs among various patient subgroups, although the three previously mentioned factors are still of primary importance. For example, it is noted that information concerning intracerebral lesions is useful in predicting outcome for certain patients. The overall predictive accuracy of the tree technique for these data is 77.7%, which is somewhat higher than that obtained via standard prediction methods. The predictive accuracy is highest among patients who have a good recovery or die; it is lower for patients having intermediate outcomes.
预测树技术被用于分析弗吉尼亚医学院医院收治的555例重度颅脑损伤患者的数据。研究了23个预后指标,以预测12个月结局在格拉斯哥预后量表五个类别中的分布情况。一个说明预后模式的树形图提供了关键阈值水平,将患者分为不同风险程度的亚组。这是一种直观有用的观察颅脑损伤患者预后的方法。在以往针对该预测问题的分析中,所有患者都使用了相同的一组预后因素(年龄、运动评分和瞳孔反应)。这些方法可能被认为不够灵活,因为针对不同患者,通过不同因素组合可能会获得更具信息量的预测。树形分析表明,尽管上述三个因素仍然至关重要,但不同患者亚组中重要预后因素的模式有所不同。例如,注意到关于脑内病变的信息对某些患者的预后预测有用。这些数据的树形技术总体预测准确率为77.7%,略高于通过标准预测方法获得的准确率。在恢复良好或死亡的患者中预测准确率最高;中等结局的患者预测准确率较低。