Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33382379›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2020

Automatically Explaining Machine Learning Prediction Results on Asthma Hospital Visits in Patients With Asthma: Secondary Analysis.

Gang Luo, Michael D Johnson, Flory L Nkoy, Shan He, Bryan L Stone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Artificial Intelligence Techniques to Predict the Airway Disorders Illness: A Systematic Review.Archives of computational methods in engineering : state of the art reviews · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Gang LuoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7217-4008
Michael D JohnsonDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5483-5933
Flory L NkoyDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8954-8288
Shan HeCare Transformation and Information Systems, Intermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7982-9625
Bryan L StoneDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0912-5227

Funding

Using Computational Approaches to Optimize Asthma Care ManagementR01HL142503 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LUO, GANG · 2018 to 2021
$3.3M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL142503
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAsthma is a major chronic disease that poses a heavy burden on health care. To facilitate the allocation of care management resources aimed at improving outcomes for high-risk patients with asthma, we recently built a machine learning model to predict asthma hospital visits in the subsequent year in patients with asthma. Our model is more accurate than previous models. However, like most machine learning models, it offers no explanation of its prediction results. This creates a barrier for use in care management, where interpretability is desired.

objectiveThis study aims to develop a method to automatically explain the prediction results of the model and recommend tailored interventions without lowering the performance measures of the model.

methodsOur data were imbalanced, with only a small portion of data instances linking to future asthma hospital visits. To handle imbalanced data, we extended our previous method of automatically offering rule-formed explanations for the prediction results of any machine learning model on tabular data without lowering the model's performance measures. In a secondary analysis of the 334,564 data instances from Intermountain Healthcare between 2005 and 2018 used to form our model, we employed the extended method to automatically explain the prediction results of our model and recommend tailored interventions. The patient cohort consisted of all patients with asthma who received care at Intermountain Healthcare between 2005 and 2018, and resided in Utah or Idaho as recorded at the visit.

resultsOur method explained the prediction results for 89.7% (391/436) of the patients with asthma who, per our model's correct prediction, were likely to incur asthma hospital visits in the subsequent year.

conclusionsThis study is the first to demonstrate the feasibility of automatically offering rule-formed explanations for the prediction results of any machine learning model on imbalanced tabular data without lowering the performance measures of the model. After further improvement, our asthma outcome prediction model coupled with the automatic explanation function could be used by clinicians to guide the allocation of limited asthma care management resources and the identification of appropriate interventions.

Indexed as

asthmaforecastingmachine learningpatient care management

Identifiers

PMID33382379
PMCPMC7808890

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.