Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33799968›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Predicting Survival in Veterans with Follicular Lymphoma Using Structured Electronic Health Record Information and Machine Learning.

Chunyang Li, Vikas Patil, Kelli M Rasmussen, Christina Yong, Hsu-Chih Chien, Debbie Morreall, Jeffrey Humpherys, Brian C Sauer, Zachary Burningham, Ahmad S Halwani

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chunyang LiVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Vikas PatilVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Kelli M RasmussenVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2946-9211
Christina YongVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Hsu-Chih ChienVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Debbie MorreallVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Jeffrey HumpherysVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3981-1217
Brian C SauerVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Zachary BurninghamVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Ahmad S HalwaniVeritas, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
University of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The most accurate prognostic approach for follicular lymphoma (FL), progression of disease at 24 months (POD24), requires two years' observation after initiating first-line therapy (L1) to predict outcomes. We applied machine learning to structured electronic health record (EHR) data to predict individual survival at L1 initiation. We grouped 523 observations and 1933 variables from a nationwide cohort of FL patients diagnosed 2006-2014 in the Veterans Health Administration into traditionally used prognostic variables ("curated"), commonly measured labs ("labs"), and International Classification of Diseases diagnostic codes ("ICD") sets. We compared performance of random survival forests (RSF) vs. traditional Cox model using four datasets: curated, curated + labs, curated + ICD, and curated + ICD + labs, also using Cox on curated + POD24. We evaluated variable importance and partial dependence plots with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RSF with curated + labs performed best, with mean AUC 0.73 (95% CI: 0.71-0.75). It approximated, but did not surpass, Cox with POD24 (mean AUC 0.74 [95% CI: 0.71-0.77]). RSF using EHR data achieved better performance than traditional prognostic variables, setting the foundation for the incorporation of our algorithm into the EHR. It also provides for possible future scenarios in which clinicians could be provided an EHR-based tool which approximates the predictive ability of the most accurate known indicator, using information available 24 months earlier.

Indexed as

Lymphoma, FollicularVeteransElectronic Health RecordsHumansInternational Classification of DiseasesMachine Learningelectronic health recordsfollicular lymphomahealthcaremachine learningmedical and health datapredictive analyticsprognosisrandom survival forestsurvival analysisveterans health administration

Identifiers

PMID33799968
PMCPMC7967359
OpenAlexW3135548402

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.