aplicación de las redes neuronales artificiales para la estratificación de riesgo de mortalidad hospitalaria application of artificial neural networks for risk stratification of hospital mortality

Clicks: 351
ID: 201083
2003
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #20 of 143 articles by views in cognition and emotion

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 143 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Objetivo: Comparar la capacidad de predicción de mortalidad hospitalaria de una red neuronal artificial (RNA) con el Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) y la regresión logística (RL), y comparar la asignación de probabilidades entre los distintos modelos. Método: Se recogen de forma prospectiva las variables necesarias para el cálculo del APACHE II. Disponemos de 1.146 pacientes asignándose aleatoriamente (70 y 30%) al grupo de Desarrollo (800) y al de Validación (346). Con las mismas variables se genera un modelo de RL y de RNA (perceptrón de 3 capas entrenado por algoritmo de backpropagation con remuestreo bootstrap y con 9 nodos en la capa oculta) en el grupo de desarrollo. Se comparan los tres modelos en función de los criterios de discriminación con el área bajo la curva ROC (ABC [IC del 95%]) y de calibración con el test de Hosmer-Lemeshow C (HLC). Las diferencias entre las probabilidades se valoran con el test de Bland-Altman. Resultados: En el grupo de validación, el APACHE II con ABC de 0,79 (0,75-0,84) y HLC de 11 (p = 0,329); modelo RL, ABC de 0,81 (0,76-0,85) y HLC de 29 (p = 0,0001), y en RNA, ABC de 0,82 (0,77-0,86) y HLC de 10 (p = 0,404). Los pacientes con mayores diferencias en la asignación de probabilidad entre RL y RN (8% del total) son pacientes con problemas neurológicos. Los peores resultados se obtienen en los pacientes traumáticos (ABC inferior a 0,75 en todos los modelos). En los pacientes respiratorios, la RNA alcanza los mejores resultados (ABC = 0,87 [0,78-0,91]). Conclusiones: Una RNA es capaz de estratificar el riesgo de mortalidad hospitalaria utilizando las variables del sistema APACHE II. La RNA consigue mejores resultados frente a RL, sin alcanzar significación, ya que no trabaja con restricciones lineales ni de independencia de variables, con una diferente asignación de probabilidad individual entre los modelos.
Objective: To compare the ability of an artificial neural network (ANN) to predict hospital mortality with that of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) system and multiple logistic regression (LR). A secondary objective was to compare the allocation of individual probability among the models. Method: The variables required for calculating the APACHE II were prospectively collected. A total of 1146 patients were divided (randomly 70% and 30%) into the Development (800) and the Validation (346) sets. With the same variables an LR model and an ANN were carried out (a 3-layer perceptron trained by algorithm backpropagation with bootstrap resampling and with 9 nodes in the hidden layer) in the Development set. The models developed were contrasted with the Validation set and their discrimination properties were evaluated using the area under the ROC curve (AUC [95% CI]) and calibration with the Hosmer-Lemeshow C (HLC) test. Differences between the probabilities were evaluated using the Bland-Altman test. Results: The Validation set showed an APACHE II with an AUC = 0.79 (0.75-0.84) and HLC = 11 (p = 0.329); LR model AUC = 0.81 (0.76-0.85) and HLC = 29 (p = 0.0001) and an ANN AUC = 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and HLC = 10 (p = 0.404). The patients with the most important differences in the allocation of probability between LR and ANN (8% of the total) were neurological. The worst results were found in trauma patients with an AUC of not greater than 0.75 in all the models. In respiratory patients, the ANN achieved the best AUC = 0.87 (0.78-0.91). Conclusions: The ANN was able to stratify hospital mortality risk by using the APACHE II system variables. The ANN tended to achieve better results than LR, since, in order to work, it does not require lineal restrictions or independent variables. Allocation of individual probability differed in each model.
Reference Key
trujillano2003gacetaaplicacin Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;J. Trujillano;J. March;M. Badia;A. Rodríguez;A. Sorribas
Journal cognition and emotion
Year 2003
DOI
DOI not found
URL
http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0213-91112003000600012
Keywords
artificial neural network mortality risk assessment intensive care unit bootstrap unidad de cuidados intensivos bootstrappublic aspects of medicine

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.