IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0232414.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Machine learning provides evidence that stroke risk is not linear: The non-linear Framingham stroke risk score

Author

Listed:
  • Agni Orfanoudaki
  • Emma Chesley
  • Christian Cadisch
  • Barry Stein
  • Amre Nouh
  • Mark J Alberts
  • Dimitris Bertsimas

Abstract

Current stroke risk assessment tools presume the impact of risk factors is linear and cumulative. However, both novel risk factors and their interplay influencing stroke incidence are difficult to reveal using traditional additive models. The goal of this study was to improve upon the established Revised Framingham Stroke Risk Score and design an interactive Non-Linear Stroke Risk Score. Leveraging machine learning algorithms, our work aimed at increasing the accuracy of event prediction and uncovering new relationships in an interpretable fashion. A two-phase approach was used to create our stroke risk prediction score. First, clinical examinations of the Framingham offspring cohort were utilized as the training dataset for the predictive model. Optimal Classification Trees were used to develop a tree-based model to predict 10-year risk of stroke. Unlike classical methods, this algorithm adaptively changes the splits on the independent variables, introducing non-linear interactions among them. Second, the model was validated with a multi-ethnicity cohort from the Boston Medical Center. Our stroke risk score suggests a key dichotomy between patients with history of cardiovascular disease and the rest of the population. While it agrees with known findings, it also identified 23 unique stroke risk profiles and highlighted new non-linear relationships; such as the role of T-wave abnormality on electrocardiography and hematocrit levels in a patient’s risk profile. Our results suggested that the non-linear approach significantly improves upon the baseline in the c-statistic (training 87.43% (CI 0.85–0.90) vs. 73.74% (CI 0.70–0.76); validation 75.29% (CI 0.74–0.76) vs 65.93% (CI 0.64–0.67), even in multi-ethnicity populations. The clinical implications of the new risk score include prioritization of risk factor modification and personalized care at the patient level with improved targeting of interventions for stroke prevention.

Suggested Citation

  • Agni Orfanoudaki & Emma Chesley & Christian Cadisch & Barry Stein & Amre Nouh & Mark J Alberts & Dimitris Bertsimas, 2020. "Machine learning provides evidence that stroke risk is not linear: The non-linear Framingham stroke risk score," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0232414
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232414
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232414
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232414&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0232414?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. Crookston, Nicholas L. & Finley, Andrew O., 2008. "yaImpute: An R Package for kNN Imputation," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 23(i10).
    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. Dimitris Bertsimas & Agni Orfanoudaki & Rory B. Weiner, 2020. "Personalized treatment for coronary artery disease patients: a machine learning approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 482-506, 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. Gérard Biau & Erwan Scornet, 2016. "A random forest guided tour," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(2), pages 197-227, June.
    2. Kowarik, Alexander & Templ, Matthias, 2016. "Imputation with the R Package VIM," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 74(i07).
    3. Hui Peng & He Wang & Weijia Kong & Jinyan Li & Wilson Wen Bin Goh, 2024. "Optimizing differential expression analysis for proteomics data via high-performing rules and ensemble inference," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Anton Kocheturov & Panos M. Pardalos & Athanasia Karakitsiou, 2019. "Massive datasets and machine learning for computational biomedicine: trends and challenges," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 276(1), pages 5-34, May.
    5. Cécile C. Remy & Alisa R. Keyser & Dan J. Krofcheck & Marcy E. Litvak & Matthew D. Hurteau, 2021. "Future fire-driven landscape changes along a southwestern US elevation gradient," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.

    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:pone00:0232414. 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.