IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0214365.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen F Weng
  • Luis Vaz
  • Nadeem Qureshi
  • Joe Kai

Abstract

Background: Prognostic modelling using standard methods is well-established, particularly for predicting risk of single diseases. Machine-learning may offer potential to explore outcomes of even greater complexity, such as premature death. This study aimed to develop novel prediction algorithms using machine-learning, in addition to standard survival modelling, to predict premature all-cause mortality. Methods: A prospective population cohort of 502,628 participants aged 40–69 years were recruited to the UK Biobank from 2006–2010 and followed-up until 2016. Participants were assessed on a range of demographic, biometric, clinical and lifestyle factors. Mortality data by ICD-10 were obtained from linkage to Office of National Statistics. Models were developed using deep learning, random forest and Cox regression. Calibration was assessed by comparing observed to predicted risks; and discrimination by area under the ‘receiver operating curve’ (AUC). Findings: 14,418 deaths (2.9%) occurred over a total follow-up time of 3,508,454 person-years. A simple age and gender Cox model was the least predictive (AUC 0.689, 95% CI 0.681–0.699). A multivariate Cox regression model significantly improved discrimination by 6.2% (AUC 0.751, 95% CI 0.748–0.767). The application of machine-learning algorithms further improved discrimination by 3.2% using random forest (AUC 0.783, 95% CI 0.776–0.791) and 3.9% using deep learning (AUC 0.790, 95% CI 0.783–0.797). These ML algorithms improved discrimination by 9.4% and 10.1% respectively from a simple age and gender Cox regression model. Random forest and deep learning achieved similar levels of discrimination with no significant difference. Machine-learning algorithms were well-calibrated, while Cox regression models consistently over-predicted risk. Conclusions: Machine-learning significantly improved accuracy of prediction of premature all-cause mortality in this middle-aged population, compared to standard methods. This study illustrates the value of machine-learning for risk prediction within a traditional epidemiological study design, and how this approach might be reported to assist scientific verification.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen F Weng & Luis Vaz & Nadeem Qureshi & Joe Kai, 2019. "Prediction of premature all-cause mortality: A prospective general population cohort study comparing machine-learning and standard epidemiological approaches," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-22, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0214365
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214365
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214365
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214365&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0214365?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen F Weng & Jenna Reps & Joe Kai & Jonathan M Garibaldi & Nadeem Qureshi, 2017. "Can machine-learning improve cardiovascular risk prediction using routine clinical data?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Andre Esteva & Brett Kuprel & Roberto A. Novoa & Justin Ko & Susan M. Swetter & Helen M. Blau & Sebastian Thrun, 2017. "Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 542(7639), pages 115-118, February.
    3. Kun-Hsing Yu & Ce Zhang & Gerald J. Berry & Russ B. Altman & Christopher Ré & Daniel L. Rubin & Michael Snyder, 2016. "Predicting non-small cell lung cancer prognosis by fully automated microscopic pathology image features," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, November.
    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. George Papantonopoulos & Chryssa Delatola & Keiso Takahashi & Marja L Laine & Bruno G Loos, 2019. "Hidden noise in immunologic parameters might explain rapid progression in early-onset periodontitis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Salvatore Tedesco & Martina Andrulli & Markus Åkerlund Larsson & Daniel Kelly & Antti Alamäki & Suzanne Timmons & John Barton & Joan Condell & Brendan O’Flynn & Anna Nordström, 2021. "Comparison of Machine Learning Techniques for Mortality Prediction in a Prospective Cohort of Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-18, December.

    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. Emily J MacKay & Michael D Stubna & Corey Chivers & Michael E Draugelis & William J Hanson & Nimesh D Desai & Peter W Groeneveld, 2021. "Application of machine learning approaches to administrative claims data to predict clinical outcomes in medical and surgical patient populations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Mirza Rizwan Sajid & Bader A. Almehmadi & Waqas Sami & Mansour K. Alzahrani & Noryanti Muhammad & Christophe Chesneau & Asif Hanif & Arshad Ali Khan & Ahmad Shahbaz, 2021. "Development of Nonlaboratory-Based Risk Prediction Models for Cardiovascular Diseases Using Conventional and Machine Learning Approaches," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Lin Lu & Laurent Dercle & Binsheng Zhao & Lawrence H. Schwartz, 2021. "Deep learning for the prediction of early on-treatment response in metastatic colorectal cancer from serial medical imaging," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Salvatore Tedesco & Martina Andrulli & Markus Åkerlund Larsson & Daniel Kelly & Antti Alamäki & Suzanne Timmons & John Barton & Joan Condell & Brendan O’Flynn & Anna Nordström, 2021. "Comparison of Machine Learning Techniques for Mortality Prediction in a Prospective Cohort of Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Zheng Yan & Wenqian Robertson & Yaosheng Lou & Tom W. Robertson & Sung Yong Park, 2021. "Finding leading scholars in mobile phone behavior: a mixed-method analysis of an emerging interdisciplinary field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9499-9517, December.
    6. Ajay Dev & Sanjay Kumar Malik, 2021. "Artificial Bee Colony Optimized Deep Neural Network Model for Handling Imbalanced Stroke Data: ABC-DNN for Prediction of Stroke," International Journal of E-Health and Medical Communications (IJEHMC), IGI Global, vol. 12(5), pages 67-83, September.
    7. Freddy Gabbay & Rotem Lev Aharoni & Ori Schweitzer, 2022. "Deep Neural Network Memory Performance and Throughput Modeling and Simulation Framework," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(21), pages 1-20, November.
    8. Sebastian Gehrmann & Franck Dernoncourt & Yeran Li & Eric T Carlson & Joy T Wu & Jonathan Welt & John Foote Jr. & Edward T Moseley & David W Grant & Patrick D Tyler & Leo A Celi, 2018. "Comparing deep learning and concept extraction based methods for patient phenotyping from clinical narratives," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Feihan Lu & Yao Zheng & Harrington Cleveland & Chris Burton & David Madigan, 2018. "Bayesian hierarchical vector autoregressive models for patient-level predictive modeling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-27, December.
    10. Jungyoon Kim & Jihye Lim, 2021. "A Deep Neural Network-Based Method for Prediction of Dementia Using Big Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-13, May.
    11. Gang Yu & Kai Sun & Chao Xu & Xing-Hua Shi & Chong Wu & Ting Xie & Run-Qi Meng & Xiang-He Meng & Kuan-Song Wang & Hong-Mei Xiao & Hong-Wen Deng, 2021. "Accurate recognition of colorectal cancer with semi-supervised deep learning on pathological images," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    12. Yue Sun & Songmin Dai & Jide Li & Yin Zhang & Xiaoqiang Li, 2019. "Tooth-Marked Tongue Recognition Using Gradient-Weighted Class Activation Maps," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-12, February.
    13. DonHee Lee & Seong No Yoon, 2021. "Application of Artificial Intelligence-Based Technologies in the Healthcare Industry: Opportunities and Challenges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-18, January.
    14. Wenjuan Fan & Jingnan Liu & Shuwan Zhu & Panos M. Pardalos, 2020. "Investigating the impacting factors for the healthcare professionals to adopt artificial intelligence-based medical diagnosis support system (AIMDSS)," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 567-592, November.
    15. Dexin Chen & Meiting Fu & Liangjie Chi & Liyan Lin & Jiaxin Cheng & Weisong Xue & Chenyan Long & Wei Jiang & Xiaoyu Dong & Jian Sui & Dajia Lin & Jianping Lu & Shuangmu Zhuo & Side Liu & Guoxin Li & G, 2022. "Prognostic and predictive value of a pathomics signature in gastric cancer," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Young Jae Kim & Seung Seog Han & Hee Joo Yang & Sung Eun Chang, 2020. "Prospective, comparative evaluation of a deep neural network and dermoscopy in the diagnosis of onychomycosis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-9, June.
    17. Claus Zippel & Sabine Bohnet-Joschko, 2021. "Rise of Clinical Studies in the Field of Machine Learning: A Review of Data Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-14, May.
    18. Dario Sipari & Betsy D. M. Chaparro-Rico & Daniele Cafolla, 2022. "SANE (Easy Gait Analysis System): Towards an AI-Assisted Automatic Gait-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-27, August.
    19. Shinya Suzuki & Takeshi Yamashita & Tsuyoshi Sakama & Takuto Arita & Naoharu Yagi & Takayuki Otsuka & Hiroaki Semba & Hiroto Kano & Shunsuke Matsuno & Yuko Kato & Tokuhisa Uejima & Yuji Oikawa & Minor, 2019. "Comparison of risk models for mortality and cardiovascular events between machine learning and conventional logistic regression analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-14, September.
    20. Ying Wang & Zhicheng Du & Wayne R. Lawrence & Yun Huang & Yu Deng & Yuantao Hao, 2019. "Predicting Hepatitis B Virus Infection Based on Health Examination Data of Community Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0214365. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.