Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25980520›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2015

A Naive Bayes machine learning approach to risk prediction using censored, time-to-event data.

Julian Wolfson, Sunayan Bandyopadhyay, Mohamed Elidrisi, Gabriela Vazquez-Benitez, David M Vock, Donald Musgrove, Gediminas Adomavicius, Paul E Johnson, Patrick J O'Connor

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01420016 (Prioritized Clinical Decision Support), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01420016 nacompletednot on this map

Prioritized Clinical Decision Support (CDS) to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk

TypeinterventionalSponsorHealthPartners InstituteRan2012 to 2014Enrolled7,914ConditionsHypertension, Hyperlipidemia, Diabetes, SmokingArmsPrioritized Clinical Decision Support
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Applying Naive Bayesian Networks to Disease Prediction: a Systematic Review.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Julian WolfsonDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2032-0875
Sunayan BandyopadhyayDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
Mohamed ElidrisiDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
Gabriela Vazquez-BenitezHealthPartners Institute for Education and Research, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
David M VockDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
Donald MusgroveDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
Gediminas AdomaviciusDepartment of Information and Decision Sciences, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
Paul E JohnsonDepartment of Information and Decision Sciences, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
Patrick J O'ConnorHealthPartners Institute for Education and Research, Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR000114 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R · 2012 to 2015
$35.0M
Prioritized Clinical Decision Support to Reduce Cardiovascular RiskR01HL102144 · NHLBI · HEALTHPARTNERS INSTITUTE · PI O'CONNOR, PATRICK J · 2010 to 2014
$3.7M
Developing Treatment Policies for Complex Patients Using Modeling and Data MiningR21HS017622 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI JOHNSON, PAUL E. · 2008 to 2009
$312k
AHRQ HHS R21 HS017622AHRQ HHS R21HS017622-01NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000114NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL102144NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL102144-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predicting an individual's risk of experiencing a future clinical outcome is a statistical task with important consequences for both practicing clinicians and public health experts. Modern observational databases such as electronic health records provide an alternative to the longitudinal cohort studies traditionally used to construct risk models, bringing with them both opportunities and challenges. Large sample sizes and detailed covariate histories enable the use of sophisticated machine learning techniques to uncover complex associations and interactions, but observational databases are often 'messy', with high levels of missing data and incomplete patient follow-up. In this paper, we propose an adaptation of the well-known Naive Bayes machine learning approach to time-to-event outcomes subject to censoring. We compare the predictive performance of our method with the Cox proportional hazards model which is commonly used for risk prediction in healthcare populations, and illustrate its application to prediction of cardiovascular risk using an electronic health record dataset from a large Midwest integrated healthcare system.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremProportional Hazards ModelsBiometryCardiovascular DiseasesComputer SimulationDatabases, FactualDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedElectronic Health RecordsHumansLongitudinal StudiesMachine LearningMidwestern United StatesRiskRisk AssessmentSpace-Time Clusteringelectronic health recordsmachine learningNaive Bayesrisk predictionsurvival analysis

Identifiers

PMID25980520
PMCPMC4523419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.