Cited by 69Machine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareImbalanced Data Classification Techniques

MACE prediction of acute coronary syndrome via boosted resampling classification using electronic medical records

Open access
Huang, Zhengxing, Chan, Tak-Ming, Dong, Wei·2017·Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Abstract

Objectives Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) often occur suddenly resulting in high mortality and morbidity. Recently, the rapid development of electronic medical records (EMR) provides the opportunity to utilize the potential of EMR to improve the performance of MACE prediction. In this study, we present a novel data-mining based approach specialized for MACE prediction from a large volume of EMR data.Methods The proposed approach presents a new classification algorithm by applying both over-sampling and under-sampling on minority-class and majority-class samples, respectively, and integrating the resampling strategy into a boosting framework so that it can effectively handle imbalance of MACE of ACS patients analogous to domain practice. The method learns a new and stronger MACE prediction model each iteration from a more difficult subset of EMR data with wrongly predicted MACEs of ACS patients by a previous weak model.Results We verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach on a clinical dataset containing 2930 ACS patient samples with 268 feature types. While the imbalanced ratio does not seem extreme (25.7%), MACE prediction targets pose great challenge to traditional methods. As these methods degenerate dramatically with increasing imbalanced ratios, the performance of our approach for predicting MACE remains robust and reaches 0.672 in terms of AUC. On average, the proposed approach improves the performance of MACE prediction by 4.8%, 4.5%, 8.6% and 4.8% over the standard SVM, Adaboost, SMOTE, and the conventional GRACE risk scoring system for MACE prediction, respectively.Conclusions We consider that the proposed iterative boosting approach has demonstrated great potential to meet the challenge of MACE prediction for ACS patients using a large volume of EMR.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbi.2017.01.001

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI applied to electronic patient records predicts the risk of cardiovascular disease, such as acute coronary syndrome and heart failure, better than traditional scales.

    “Applied to electronic patient records, AI has been used to predict the risk of cardiovascular disease, for instance acute coronary syndrome (22) and heart failure (23) better than traditional scales.”

    From Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Today and Tomorrow (2020) · cites this paper as [22]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 32 · Cited by 69

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [11]11. M. Matheny, M.L. McPheeters, A. Glasser, N. Mercaldo, R.B. Weaver, R.N. Jerome, R. Walden, J.N. McKoy, J. Pritchett, C. Tsai, Systematic Review of Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment Tools Technical Report, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2011.
  2. [13]13. Z. Sun, F. Wang, J. Hu, LINKAGE: an approach for comprehensive risk prediction for care management, in: Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), 2015.

Authors
Huang, Z., Chan, T.-M., & Dong, W.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • Philips (China) (CN)
  • Chinese PLA General Hospital (CN)
Corresponding author
Huang, Zhengxing
Venue
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
66
Pages
161-170
ISSN
1532-0464 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2568394902
Cited by
69
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Biomedical Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Nature Science Foundation of China (61672450)
  • Philips (China) Investment Co., Ltd.
  • Zhejiang University
  • Eindhoven University of Technology
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Keywords
major adverse cardiac events, acute coronary syndrome, electronic health records, class imbalance, boosting, resampling, oversampling, undersampling, SMOTE, GRACE risk score, clinical risk prediction
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Humans, Databases, Factual, Acute Coronary Syndrome, Data Mining, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review