机器学习和逻辑回归模型在预测急性肾损伤中的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Comparison of machine learning and logistic regression models in predicting acute kidney injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
机构信息
ICU, DongE Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Shandong, China.
Urology Department, Tai'an Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong, China.
出版信息
Int J Med Inform. 2021 Jul;151:104484. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104484. Epub 2021 May 8.
INTRODUCTION
We aimed to assess whether machine learning models are superior at predicting acute kidney injury (AKI) compared to logistic regression (LR), a conventional prediction model.
METHODS
Eligible studies were identified using PubMed and Embase. A total of 24 studies consisting of 84 prediction models met inclusion criteria. Independent samples t-test was performed to detect mean differences in area under the curve (AUC) between ML and LR models. One-way ANOVA and post-hoc t-tests were performed to assess mean differences in AUC between ML methods.
RESULTS
AUC data were similar between ML (0.736 ± 0.116) and LR (0.748 ± 0.057) models (p = 0.538). However, specific ML models, such as gradient boosting (0.838 ± 0.077), exhibited superior performance at predicting AKI as compared to other ML models in the literature (p < 0.05). Creatinine and urine output, standard variables assessed for AKI staging, were classified as significant predictors across multiple ML models, although the majority of significant predictors were unique and study specific.
CONCLUSIONS
These data suggest that ML models perform equally to that of LR, however ML models exhibit variable performance with some ML models displaying exceptional performance. The variability in ML prediction of AKI can be attributed, in part, to the specific ML model utilized, variable selection and processing, study and subject characteristics, and the steps associated with model training, validation, testing, and calibration.
简介
我们旨在评估机器学习模型在预测急性肾损伤 (AKI) 方面是否优于逻辑回归 (LR),这是一种传统的预测模型。
方法
使用 PubMed 和 Embase 确定符合条件的研究。共有 24 项研究,包括 84 个预测模型,符合纳入标准。使用独立样本 t 检验来检测 ML 和 LR 模型之间曲线下面积 (AUC) 的均值差异。使用单因素方差分析和事后 t 检验来评估 ML 方法之间 AUC 的均值差异。
结果
ML(0.736 ± 0.116)和 LR(0.748 ± 0.057)模型之间的 AUC 数据相似(p = 0.538)。然而,特定的 ML 模型,如梯度提升(0.838 ± 0.077),在预测 AKI 方面表现优于文献中的其他 ML 模型(p < 0.05)。肌酐和尿量是评估 AKI 分期的标准变量,在多个 ML 模型中被归类为重要预测因素,尽管大多数重要预测因素是独特的和特定于研究的。
结论
这些数据表明,ML 模型的表现与 LR 相当,但 ML 模型的表现存在差异,一些 ML 模型表现出色。AKI 的 ML 预测的可变性部分归因于使用的特定 ML 模型、变量选择和处理、研究和受试者特征以及与模型训练、验证、测试和校准相关的步骤。