Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39193314›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Comparison and use of explainable machine learning-based survival models for heart failure patients.

Tao Shi, Jianping Yang, Ningli Zhang, Wei Rong, Lusha Gao, Ping Xia, Jie Zou, Na Zhu, Fazhi Yang, Lixing Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Tao ShiDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Jianping YangCollege of Big Data, Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming, China.
Ningli ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Wei RongDepartment of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Lusha GaoDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Ping XiaDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Jie ZouDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Na ZhuDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Fazhi YangDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Lixing ChenDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0746-6706

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Explainable machine learning (XAI) was introduced in this study to improve the interpretability, explainability and transparency of the modelling results. The survex package in R was used to interpret and compare two survival models - the Cox proportional hazards regression (coxph) model and the random survival forest (rfsrc) model - and to estimate overall survival (OS) and its determinants in heart failure (HF) patients using these models. Methods: We selected 1159 HF patients hospitalised at the First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University. First, the performance of the two models was investigated using the C-index, the integrated C/D AUC, and the integrated Brier score. Second, a global explanation of the whole cohort was carried out using the time-dependent variable importance and the partial dependence survival profile. Finally, the SurvSHAP(t) and SurvLIME plots and the ceteris paribus survival profile were used to obtain a local explanation for each patient. Results: By comparing the C-index, the C/D AUC, and the Brier score, this study showed that the model performance of rfsrc was better than coxph. The global explanation of the whole cohort suggests that the C-reactive protein, lg BNP (brain natriuretic peptide), estimated glomerular filtration rate, albumin, age and blood chloride were significant unfavourable predictors of OS in HF patients in both the cxoph and the rfsrc models. By including individual patients in the model, we can provide a local explanation for each patient, which guides the clinician in individualising the patient's treatment. Conclusion: By comparison, we conclude that the model performance of rfsrc is better than that of coxph. These two predictive models, which address not only the whole population but also selected patients, can help clinicians personalise the treatment of each HF patient according to his or her specific situation.

Indexed as

Cox proportional hazards regressionexplainable machine learningHeart failurerandom survival forest.survival analysis

Identifiers

PMID39193314
PMCPMC11348487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.