Comparison of machine learning algorithms for clinical event prediction (risk of coronary heart disease).

AIM

The aim of this study is to compare the utility of several supervised machine learning (ML) algorithms for predicting clinical events in terms of their internal validity and accuracy. The results, which were obtained using two statistical software platforms, were also compared.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data used in this research come from the open database of the Framingham Heart Study, which originated in 1948 in Framingham, Massachusetts as a prospective study of risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Through data mining processes, three data models were elaborated and a comparative methodological study between the different ML algorithms - decision tree, random forest, support vector machines, neural networks, and logistic regression - was carried out. The global selection criterium for choosing the right set of hyperparameters and the type of data manipulation was the area under a curve (AUC). The software tools used to analyze the data were R-Studio® and RapidMiner®.

RESULTS

The Framingham study open database contains 4240 observations. The algorithm that yielded the greatest AUC when analyzing the data in R-Studio was neural network applied to a model that excluded all observations in which there was at least one missing value (AUC = 0.71); when analyzing the data in RapidMiner and applying the same model, the best algorithm was support vector machines (AUC = 0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

ML algorithms can reinforce the diagnostic and prognostic capacity of traditional regression techniques. Differences between the applicability of those algorithms and the results obtained with them were a function of the software platforms used in the data analysis.