Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37681293›Full record

ArticleBirth defects research2023

A machine learning model for predicting congenital heart defects from administrative data.

Haoming Shi, Wendy Book, Cheryl Raskind-Hood, Karrie F Downing, Sherry L Farr, Mary N Bell, Reza Sameni, Fred H Rodriguez, Rishikesan Kamaleswaran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Birth defects research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Haoming ShiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0228-6116
Wendy BookDivision of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Cheryl Raskind-HoodDepartment of Epidemiology, Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Karrie F DowningNational Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3063-1781
Sherry L FarrNational Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Mary N BellDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Reza SameniDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Fred H RodriguezDivision of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Rishikesan KamaleswaranDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

Funding

CDC HHSIntramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInternational Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes recorded in administrative data are often used to identify congenital heart defects (CHD). However, these codes may inaccurately identify true positive (TP) CHD individuals. CHD surveillance could be strengthened by accurate CHD identification in administrative records using machine learning (ML) algorithms.

methodsTo identify features relevant to accurate CHD identification, traditional ML models were applied to a validated dataset of 779 patients; encounter level data, including ICD-9-CM and CPT codes, from 2011 to 2013 at four US sites were utilized. Five-fold cross-validation determined overlapping important features that best predicted TP CHD individuals. Median values and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of area under the receiver operating curve, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score were compared across four ML models: Logistic Regression, Gaussian Naive Bayes, Random Forest, and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost).

resultsBaseline PPV was 76.5% from expert clinician validation of ICD-9-CM CHD-related codes. Feature selection for ML decreased 7138 features to 10 that best predicted TP CHD cases. During training and testing, XGBoost performed the best in median accuracy (F1-score) and PPV, 0.84 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.91) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.96), respectively. When applied to the entire dataset, XGBoost revealed a median PPV of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.94, 0.95).

conclusionsApplying ML algorithms improved the accuracy of identifying TP CHD cases in comparison to ICD codes alone. Use of this technique to identify CHD cases would improve generalizability of results obtained from large datasets to the CHD patient population, enhancing public health surveillance efforts.

Indexed as

Heart Defects, CongenitalAlgorithmsBayes TheoremHumansMachine LearningPredictive Value of Testscongenital heart diseasemachine learningpopulation health

Identifiers

PMID37681293
PMCPMC10841295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.