Predictive performance of machine learning compared to statistical methods in time-to-event analysis of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review protocol

被引:0
|
作者
Suliman, Abubaker [1 ,2 ]
Masud, Mohammad [1 ]
Serhani, Mohamed Adel [3 ]
Abdullahi, Aminu S. [2 ]
Oulhaj, Abderrahim [4 ]
机构
[1] United Arab Emirates Univ, Coll Informat Technol, Al Ain, U Arab Emirates
[2] United Arab Emirates Univ, Inst Publ Hlth, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Al Ain, U Arab Emirates
[3] Univ Sharjah, Coll Comp & Informat, Sharjah, U Arab Emirates
[4] Khalifa Univ, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Dept Publ Hlth & Epidemiol, Abu Dhabi, U Arab Emirates
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2024年 / 14卷 / 04期
关键词
Cardiovascular Disease; Coronary heart disease; Randomized Controlled Trial; Observational Study; RISK; APPLICABILITY; PROBAST; MODEL; BIAS;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082654
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Globally, cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death, warranting effective management and prevention measures. Risk prediction tools are indispensable for directing primary and secondary prevention strategies for CVD and are critical for estimating CVD risk. Machine learning (ML) methodologies have experienced significant advancements across numerous practical domains in recent years. Several ML and statistical models predicting CVD time-to-event outcomes have been developed. However, it is not known as to which of the two model types-ML and statistical models-have higher discrimination and calibration in this regard. Hence, this planned work aims to systematically review studies that compare ML with statistical methods in terms of their predictive abilities in the case of time-to-event data with censoring.Methods Original research articles published as prognostic prediction studies, which involved the development and/or validation of a prognostic model, within a peer-reviewed journal, using cohort or experimental design with at least a 12-month follow-up period will be systematically reviewed. The review process will adhere to the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies checklist.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required for this review, as it will exclusively use data from published studies. The findings of this study will be published in an open-access journal and disseminated at scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration number CRD42023484178.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Statistical methods for the time-to-event analysis of individual participant data from multiple epidemiological studies
    Thompson, Simon
    Kaptoge, Stephen
    White, Ian
    Wood, Angela
    Perry, Philip
    Danesh, John
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 39 (05) : 1345 - 1359
  • [22] Deception detection with machine learning: A systematic review and statistical analysis
    Constancio, Alex Sebastiao
    Tsunoda, Denise Fukumi
    Nunes Silva, Helena de Fatima
    da Silveira, Jocelaine Martins
    Carvalho, Deborah Ribeiro
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2023, 18 (02):
  • [23] Machine Learning Methods in Skin Disease Recognition: A Systematic Review
    Sun, Jie
    Yao, Kai
    Huang, Guangyao
    Zhang, Chengrui
    Leach, Mark
    Huang, Kaizhu
    Yang, Xi
    [J]. PROCESSES, 2023, 11 (04)
  • [24] Prediction of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Using a Machine Learning Algorithm for Time-to-Event Outcomes: Random Survival Forest
    Liu, Hsin Yen
    Su, Jiandong
    Bonilla, Dennisse
    Duaibes, Sara
    Martinez, Juan Pablo Diaz
    Touma, Zahi
    [J]. ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY, 2023, 75 : 2897 - 2900
  • [25] Time-to-event prediction using survival analysis methods for Alzheimer's disease progression
    Sharma, Rahul
    Anand, Harsh
    Badr, Youakim
    Qiu, Robin G.
    [J]. ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA-TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH & CLINICAL INTERVENTIONS, 2021, 7 (01)
  • [26] Statistical and machine learning methods for cancer research and clinical practice: A systematic review
    Lopez-Perez, Laura
    Georga, Eleni
    Conti, Carlo
    Vicente, Victor
    Garcia, Rebeca
    Pecchia, Leandro
    Fotiadis, Dimitris
    Licitra, Lisa
    Cabrera, Maria Fernanda
    Arredondo, Maria Teresa
    Fico, Giuseppe
    [J]. BIOMEDICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING AND CONTROL, 2024, 92
  • [27] Machine learning methods to discriminate posttraumatic stress disorder: A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wang, Jing
    Ouyang, Hui
    Jiao, Runda
    Zhang, Haiyan
    Cheng, Suhui
    Shang, Zhilei
    Jia, Yanpu
    Yan, Wenjie
    Wu, Lili
    Liu, Weizhi
    [J]. DIGITAL HEALTH, 2024, 10
  • [28] Early ACLR and Risk and Timing of Secondary Meniscal Injury Compared With Delayed ACLR or Nonoperative Treatment: A Time-to-Event Analysis Using Machine Learning
    Lu, Yining
    Jurgensmeier, Kevin
    Till, Sara E.
    Reinholz, Anna
    Saris, Daniel B. F.
    Camp, Christopher L.
    Krych, Aaron J.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2022, 50 (13): : 3544 - 3556
  • [29] Statistical Methods for Adjusting Estimates of Treatment Effectiveness for Patient Nonadherence in the Context of Time-to-Event Outcomes and Health Technology Assessment: A Systematic Review of Methodological Papers
    Alshreef, Abualbishr
    Latimer, Nicholas
    Tappenden, Paul
    Wong, Ruth
    Hughes, Dyfrig
    Fotheringham, James
    Dixon, Simon
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2019, 39 (08) : 910 - 925
  • [30] Classification based on event in survival machine learning analysis of cardiovascular disease cohort
    Shokh Mukhtar Ahmad
    Nawzad Muhammed Ahmed
    [J]. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 23