Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/29323
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMora, Damiánen_US
dc.contributor.authorMateo, Jorgeen_US
dc.contributor.authorNieto, José A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBikdeli, Behnooden_US
dc.contributor.authorYamashita, Yugoen_US
dc.contributor.authorBarco, Stefanoen_US
dc.contributor.authorJimenez, Daviden_US
dc.contributor.authorDemelo‐Rodriguez, Pabloen_US
dc.contributor.authorRosa, Vladimiren_US
dc.contributor.authorYoo, Hugo Hyung Boken_US
dc.contributor.authorSadeghipour, Parhamen_US
dc.contributor.authorMonreal, Manuelen_US
dc.contributor.authorRIETE investigatorsen_US
dc.contributor.authorBosevski, Marijanen_US
dc.contributor.authorZdraveska, Marijaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-14T09:40:37Z-
dc.date.available2024-02-14T09:40:37Z-
dc.date.issued2023-03-21-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/29323-
dc.description.abstract<jats:title>Summary</jats:title><jats:p>Predictive tools for major bleeding (MB) using machine learning (ML) might be advantageous over traditional methods. We used data from the Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) to develop ML algorithms to identify patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) at increased risk of MB during the first 3 months of anticoagulation. A total of 55 baseline variables were used as predictors. New data prospectively collected from the RIETE were used for further validation. The RIETE and VTE‐BLEED scores were used for comparisons. External validation was performed with the COMMAND‐VTE database. Learning was carried out with data from 49 587 patients, of whom 873 (1.8%) had MB. The best performing ML method was XGBoost. In the prospective validation cohort the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and F1 score were: 33.2%, 93%, 10%, and 15.4% respectively. F1 value for the RIETE and VTE‐BLEED scores were 8.6% and 6.4% respectively. In the external validation cohort the metrics were 10.3%, 87.6%, 3.5% and 5.2% respectively. In that cohort, the F1 value for the RIETE score was 17.3% and for the VTE‐BLEED score 9.75%. The performance of the XGBoost algorithm was better than that from the RIETE and VTE‐BLEED scores only in the prospective validation cohort, but not in the external validation cohort.</jats:p>en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBritish Journal of Haematologyen_US
dc.titleMachine learning to predict major bleeding during anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism: possibilities and limitationsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/bjh.18737-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/bjh.18737-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full-xml/10.1111/bjh.18737-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/bjh.18737-
dc.identifier.volume201-
dc.identifier.issue5-
dc.identifier.fpage971-
dc.identifier.lpage981-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextopen-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
crisitem.author.deptFaculty of Medicine-
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Medicine: Journal Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
2023, mora, machine learning.pdf1.79 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

37
checked on May 4, 2025

Download(s)

4
checked on May 4, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.