IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v8y2020i10p1814-d429628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Performance Evaluation of Classification Algorithms for Clinical Decision Support Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Bayu Adhi Tama

    (Data Science Group, Center for Mathematical and Computational Sciences, Institute for Basic Science (IBS), Daejeon 34141, Korea)

  • Sunghoon Lim

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology, Ulsan 44919, Korea)

Abstract

Classification algorithms are widely taken into account for clinical decision support systems. However, it is not always straightforward to understand the behavior of such algorithms on a multiple disease prediction task. When a new classifier is introduced, we, in most cases, will ask ourselves whether the classifier performs well on a particular clinical dataset or not. The decision to utilize classifiers mostly relies upon the type of data and classification task, thus making it often made arbitrarily. In this study, a comparative evaluation of a wide-array classifier pertaining to six different families, i.e., tree, ensemble, neural, probability, discriminant, and rule-based classifiers are dealt with. A number of real-world publicly datasets ranging from different diseases are taken into account in the experiment in order to demonstrate the generalizability of the classifiers in multiple disease prediction. A total of 25 classifiers, 14 datasets, and three different resampling techniques are explored. This study reveals that the classifier that is likely to become the best performer is the conditional inference tree forest (cforest), followed by linear discriminant analysis, generalize linear model, random forest, and Gaussian process classifier. This work contributes to existing literature regarding a thorough benchmark of classification algorithms for multiple diseases prediction.

Suggested Citation

  • Bayu Adhi Tama & Sunghoon Lim, 2020. "A Comparative Performance Evaluation of Classification Algorithms for Clinical Decision Support Systems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-25, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:10:p:1814-:d:429628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/10/1814/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/10/1814/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mogensen, Ulla B. & Ishwaran, Hemant & Gerds, Thomas A., 2012. "Evaluating Random Forests for Survival Analysis Using Prediction Error Curves," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 50(i11).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ying Chen & Qi Da & Weizhang Liang & Peng Xiao & Bing Dai & Guoyan Zhao, 2022. "Bagged Ensemble of Gaussian Process Classifiers for Assessing Rockburst Damage Potential with an Imbalanced Dataset," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-22, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aizawa, Toshiaki, 2021. "Inequality of opportunity in infant mortality in South Asia: A decomposition analysis of survival data," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    2. Kamaryn T. Tanner & Linda D. Sharples & Rhian M. Daniel & Ruth H. Keogh, 2021. "Dynamic survival prediction combining landmarking with a machine learning ensemble: Methodology and empirical comparison," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 3-30, January.
    3. Arfan Raheen Afzal & Jing Yang & Xuewen Lu, 2021. "Variable selection in partially linear additive hazards model with grouped covariates and a diverging number of parameters," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 829-855, June.
    4. Hoora Moradian & Denis Larocque & François Bellavance, 2017. "$$L_1$$ L 1 splitting rules in survival forests," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 671-691, October.
    5. Lore Zumeta-Olaskoaga & Maximilian Weigert & Jon Larruskain & Eder Bikandi & Igor Setuain & Josean Lekue & Helmut Küchenhoff & Dae-Jin Lee, 2023. "Prediction of sports injuries in football: a recurrent time-to-event approach using regularized Cox models," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 107(1), pages 101-126, March.
    6. Chunyang Li & Vikas Patil & Kelli M. Rasmussen & Christina Yong & Hsu-Chih Chien & Debbie Morreall & Jeffrey Humpherys & Brian C. Sauer & Zachary Burningham & Ahmad S. Halwani, 2021. "Predicting Survival in Veterans with Follicular Lymphoma Using Structured Electronic Health Record Information and Machine Learning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-19, March.
    7. Zhengnan Huang & Hongjiu Zhang & Jonathan Boss & Stephen A Goutman & Bhramar Mukherjee & Ivo D Dinov & Yuanfang Guan & for the Pooled Resource Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials Consortium, 2017. "Complete hazard ranking to analyze right-censored data: An ALS survival study," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Wang, Shikun & Li, Zhao & Lan, Lan & Zhao, Jieyi & Zheng, W. Jim & Li, Liang, 2022. "GPU accelerated estimation of a shared random effect joint model for dynamic prediction," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    9. Julia Gilhodes & Florence Dalenc & Jocelyn Gal & Christophe Zemmour & Eve Leconte & Jean Marie Boher & Thomas Filleron, 2020. "Comparison of Variable Selection Methods for Time-to-Event Data in High-Dimensional Settings," Post-Print hal-02934793, HAL.
    10. Mikulec Artur & Misztal Małgorzata, 2018. "Does the Type of Business Activity and the Enterprise Location Affect a Firm’S Survival? Results of an Analysis for Natural Persons Conducting Economic Activity in the Łódzkie Voivodship," Econometrics. Advances in Applied Data Analysis, Sciendo, vol. 22(3), pages 23-40, September.
    11. Sill, Martin & Hielscher, Thomas & Becker, Natalia & Zucknick, Manuela, 2014. "c060: Extended Inference with Lasso and Elastic-Net Regularized Cox and Generalized Linear Models," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 62(i05).
    12. Heidi Seibold & Christoph Bernau & Anne-Laure Boulesteix & Riccardo De Bin, 2018. "On the choice and influence of the number of boosting steps for high-dimensional linear Cox-models," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 1195-1215, September.
    13. Chu Dani & Swartz Tim B., 2020. "Foul accumulation in the NBA," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 16(4), pages 301-309, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:10:p:1814-:d:429628. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.