Dataset Information

What would other emergency stroke teams do? Using explainable machine learning to understand variation in thrombolysis practice.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The aim of this work was to understand between-hospital variation in thrombolysis use among emergency stroke admissions in England and Wales.

Patients

A total of 88,928 patients who arrived at all 132 emergency stroke hospitals in England Wales within 4 h of stroke onset, from 2016 to 2018.

Methods

Machine learning was applied to the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP) data set, to learn which patients in each hospital would likely receive thrombolysis. We used XGBoost machine learning models, coupled with a SHAP model for explainability; Shapley (SHAP) values, providing estimates of how patient features, and hospital identity, influence the odds of receiving thrombolysis.

Results

Thrombolysis use in patients arriving within 4 h of known or estimated stroke onset ranged 7% -49% between hospitals. The odds of receiving thrombolysis reduced 9-fold over the first 120 min of arrival-to-scan time, varied 30-fold with stroke severity, reduced 3-fold with estimated rather than precise stroke onset time, fell 6-fold with increasing pre-stroke disability, fell 4-fold with onset during sleep, fell 5-fold with use of anticoagulants, fell 2-fold between 80 and 110 years of age, reduced 3-fold between 120 and 240 min of onset-to-arrival time and varied 13-fold between hospitals. The majority of between-hospital variance was explained by the hospital, rather than the differences in local patient populations.

Conclusions

Using explainable machine learning, we identified that the majority of the between-hospital variation in thrombolysis use in England and Wales may be explained by differences in in-hospital processes and differences in attitudes to judging suitability for thrombolysis.

SUBMITTER: Pearn K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10683721 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What would other emergency stroke teams do? Using explainable machine learning to understand variation in thrombolysis practice.

Pearn Kerry K Allen Michael M Laws Anna A Monks Thomas T Everson Richard R James Martin M

European stroke journal 20230722 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>The aim of this work was to understand between-hospital variation in thrombolysis use among emergency stroke admissions in England and Wales.<h4>Patients</h4>A total of 88,928 patients who arrived at all 132 emergency stroke hospitals in England Wales within 4 h of stroke onset, from 2016 to 2018.<h4>Methods</h4>Machine learning was applied to the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP) data set, to learn which patients in each hospital would likely receive thrombol ...[more]

PMID: 37480324

Similar Datasets

Project description:Failure to predict stroke promptly may lead to delayed treatment, causing severe consequences like permanent neurological damage or death. Early detection using deep learning (DL) and machine learning (ML) models can enhance patient outcomes and mitigate the long-term effects of strokes. The aim of this study is to compare these models, exploring their efficacy in predicting stroke. This study analyzed a dataset comprising 663 records from patients hospitalized at Hazrat Rasool Akram Hospital in Tehran, Iran, including 401 healthy individuals and 262 stroke patients. A total of eight established ML (SVM, XGB, KNN, RF) and DL (DNN, FNN, LSTM, CNN) models were utilized to predict stroke. Techniques such as 10-fold cross-validation and hyperparameter tuning were implemented to prevent overfitting. The study also focused on interpretability through Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP). The evaluation of model's performance was based on accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, F1-score, and ROC curve metrics. Among DL models, LSTM showed superior sensitivity at 96.15%, while FNN exhibited better specificity (96.0%), accuracy (96.0%), F1-score (95.0%), and ROC (98.0%) among DL models. For ML models, RF displayed higher sensitivity (99.9%), accuracy (99.0%), specificity (100%), F1-score (99.0%), and ROC (99.9%). Overall, RF outperformed all models, while DL models surpassed ML models in most metrics except for RF. DL models (CNN, LSTM, DNN, FNN) achieved sensitivities from 93.0 to 96.15%, specificities from 80.0 to 96.0%, accuracies from 92.0 to 96.0%, F1-scores from 87.34 to 95.0%, and ROC scores from 95.0 to 98.0%. In contrast, ML models (KNN, XGB, SVM) showed sensitivities between 29.0% and 94.0%, specificities between 89.47% and 96.0%, accuracies between 71.0% and 95.0%, F1-scores between 44.0% and 95.0%, and ROC scores between 64.0% and 95.0%. This study demonstrates the efficacy of DL and ML models in predicting stroke, with the RF models outperforming all others in key metrics. While DL models generally surpassed ML models, RF's exceptional performance highlights the potential of combining these technologies for early stroke detection, significantly improving patient outcomes by preventing severe consequences like permanent neurological damage or death.

Project description:PurposeRecently, laser refractive surgery options, including laser epithelial keratomileusis, laser in situ keratomileusis, and small incision lenticule extraction, successfully improved patients' quality of life. Evidence-based recommendation for an optimal surgery technique is valuable in increasing patient satisfaction. We developed an interpretable multiclass machine learning model that selects the laser surgery option on the expert level.MethodsA multiclass XGBoost model was constructed to classify patients into four categories including laser epithelial keratomileusis, laser in situ keratomileusis, small incision lenticule extraction, and contraindication groups. The analysis included 18,480 subjects who intended to undergo refractive surgery at the B&VIIT Eye center. Training (n = 10,561) and internal validation (n = 2640) were performed using subjects who visited between 2016 and 2017. The model was trained based on clinical decisions of highly experienced experts and ophthalmic measurements. External validation (n = 5279) was conducted using subjects who visited in 2018. The SHapley Additive ex-Planations technique was adopted to explain the output of the XGBoost model.ResultsThe multiclass XGBoost model exhibited an accuracy of 81.0% and 78.9% when tested on the internal and external validation datasets, respectively. The SHapley Additive ex-Planations explanations for the results were consistent with prior knowledge from ophthalmologists. The explanation from one-versus-one and one-versus-rest XGBoost classifiers was effective for easily understanding users in the multicategorical classification problem.ConclusionsThis study suggests an expert-level multiclass machine learning model for selecting the refractive surgery for patients. It also provided a clinical understanding in a multiclass problem based on an explainable artificial intelligence technique.Translational relevanceExplainable machine learning exhibits a promising future for increasing the practical use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmic clinics.

Dataset Information

What would other emergency stroke teams do? Using explainable machine learning to understand variation in thrombolysis practice.

Introduction

Patients

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

What would other emergency stroke teams do? Using explainable machine learning to understand variation in thrombolysis practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets