Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31822270›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2019

Using machine learning models to improve stroke risk level classification methods of China national stroke screening.

Xuemeng Li, Di Bian, Jinghui Yu, Mei Li, Dongsheng Zhao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Stroke risk prediction using machine learning: a prospective cohort study of 0.5 million Chinese adults.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors.

Xuemeng LiInformation Center, Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Di BianSchool of Electrical and Control Engineering, Xi'an University of Science and Technology|, Xi'an, China.
Jinghui YuInformation Center, Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Mei LiChina Stroke Data Center, Beijing, China.
Dongsheng ZhaoInformation Center, Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. dszhao@bmi.ac.cn.ORCID 0000-0003-2616-8891

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the character of high incidence, high prevalence and high mortality, stroke has brought a heavy burden to families and society in China. In 2009, the Ministry of Health of China launched the China national stroke screening and intervention program, which screens stroke and its risk factors and conducts high-risk population interventions for people aged above 40 years old all over China. In this program, stroke risk factors include hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, smoking, lack of exercise, apparently overweight and family history of stroke. People with more than two risk factors or history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) are considered as high-risk. However, it is impossible for this criterion to classify stroke risk levels for people with unknown values in fields of risk factors. The missing of stroke risk levels results in reduced efficiency of stroke interventions and inaccuracies in statistical results at the national level. In this paper, we use 2017 national stroke screening data to develop stroke risk classification models based on machine learning algorithms to improve the classification efficiency.

methodFirstly, we construct training set and test sets and process the imbalance training set based on oversampling and undersampling method. Then, we develop logistic regression model, Naïve Bayesian model, Bayesian network model, decision tree model, neural network model, random forest model, bagged decision tree model, voting model and boosting model with decision trees to classify stroke risk levels.

resultThe recall of the boosting model with decision trees is the highest (99.94%), and the precision of the model based on the random forest is highest (97.33%). Using the random forest model (recall: 98.44%), the recall will be increased by about 2.8% compared with the method currently used, and several thousands more people with high risk of stroke can be identified each year.

conclusionModels developed in this paper can improve the current screening method in the way that it can avoid the impact of unknown values, and avoid unnecessary rescreening and intervention expenditures. The national stroke screening program can choose classification models according to the practice need.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesMachine LearningMass ScreeningRisk AssessmentAdultAlgorithmsChinaDecision TreesHumansIncidenceLogistic ModelsNeural Networks, ComputerStrokeMachine learning modelsNational Stroke ScreeningRisk level classification

Identifiers

PMID31822270
PMCPMC6902572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.