IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0286269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improvement of predictive accuracies of functional outcomes after subacute stroke inpatient rehabilitation by machine learning models

Author

Listed:
  • Yuta Miyazaki
  • Michiyuki Kawakami
  • Kunitsugu Kondo
  • Masahiro Tsujikawa
  • Kaoru Honaga
  • Kanjiro Suzuki
  • Tetsuya Tsuji

Abstract

Objectives: Stepwise linear regression (SLR) is the most common approach to predicting activities of daily living at discharge with the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) in stroke patients, but noisy nonlinear clinical data decrease the predictive accuracies of SLR. Machine learning is gaining attention in the medical field for such nonlinear data. Previous studies reported that machine learning models, regression tree (RT), ensemble learning (EL), artificial neural networks (ANNs), support vector regression (SVR), and Gaussian process regression (GPR), are robust to such data and increase predictive accuracies. This study aimed to compare the predictive accuracies of SLR and these machine learning models for FIM scores in stroke patients. Methods: Subacute stroke patients (N = 1,046) who underwent inpatient rehabilitation participated in this study. Only patients’ background characteristics and FIM scores at admission were used to build each predictive model of SLR, RT, EL, ANN, SVR, and GPR with 10-fold cross-validation. The coefficient of determination (R2) and root mean square error (RMSE) values were compared between the actual and predicted discharge FIM scores and FIM gain. Results: Machine learning models (R2 of RT = 0.75, EL = 0.78, ANN = 0.81, SVR = 0.80, GPR = 0.81) outperformed SLR (0.70) to predict discharge FIM motor scores. The predictive accuracies of machine learning methods for FIM total gain (R2 of RT = 0.48, EL = 0.51, ANN = 0.50, SVR = 0.51, GPR = 0.54) were also better than of SLR (0.22). Conclusions: This study suggested that the machine learning models outperformed SLR for predicting FIM prognosis. The machine learning models used only patients’ background characteristics and FIM scores at admission and more accurately predicted FIM gain than previous studies. ANN, SVR, and GPR outperformed RT and EL. GPR could have the best predictive accuracy for FIM prognosis.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuta Miyazaki & Michiyuki Kawakami & Kunitsugu Kondo & Masahiro Tsujikawa & Kaoru Honaga & Kanjiro Suzuki & Tetsuya Tsuji, 2023. "Improvement of predictive accuracies of functional outcomes after subacute stroke inpatient rehabilitation by machine learning models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(5), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0286269
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0286269
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0286269&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0286269?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. Wenjuan Wang & Martin Kiik & Niels Peek & Vasa Curcin & Iain J Marshall & Anthony G Rudd & Yanzhong Wang & Abdel Douiri & Charles D Wolfe & Benjamin Bray, 2020. "A systematic review of machine learning models for predicting outcomes of stroke with structured data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Marcel Lucas Chee & Marcus Eng Hock Ong & Fahad Javaid Siddiqui & Zhongheng Zhang & Shir Lynn Lim & Andrew Fu Wah Ho & Nan Liu, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence Applications for COVID-19 in Intensive Care and Emergency Settings: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-15, April.
    2. Ching-Heng Lin & Ya-Wen Kuo & Yen-Chu Huang & Meng Lee & Yi-Wei Huang & Chang-Fu Kuo & Jiann-Der Lee, 2023. "Development and Validation of a Novel Score for Predicting Long-Term Mortality after an Acute Ischemic Stroke," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Josline Adhiambo Otieno & Jenny Häggström & David Darehed & Marie Eriksson, 2024. "Developing machine learning models to predict multi-class functional outcomes and death three months after stroke in Sweden," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(5), pages 1-16, May.
    4. Hebatullah Abdulazeem & Sera Whitelaw & Gunther Schauberger & Stefanie J Klug, 2023. "A systematic review of clinical health conditions predicted by machine learning diagnostic and prognostic models trained or validated using real-world primary health care data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(9), pages 1-25, September.
    5. Vieira, Bruno Hebling & Pamplona, Gustavo Santo Pedro & Fachinello, Karim & Silva, Alice Kamensek & Foss, Maria Paula & Salmon, Carlos Ernesto Garrido, 2022. "On the prediction of human intelligence from neuroimaging: A systematic review of methods and reporting," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    6. Ozlem Cosgun & Amjad Umar & Dursun Delen, 2024. "Operational assessment of nursing homes at times of pandemic: an integrated DEA and machine learning approach," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 1-40, 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:pone00:0286269. 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.