Cited by 10Machine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

Application of convex hull analysis for the evaluation of data heterogeneity between patient populations of different origin and implications of hospital bias in downstream machine-learning-based data processing: A comparison of 4 critical-care patient datasets

Open access
Sharafutdinov, Konstantin, Bhat, Jayesh S., Fritsch, Sebastian Johannes, Nikulina, Kateryna, E. Samadi, Moein, Polzin, Richard, Mayer, Hannah, Marx, Gernot +2 more·2022·Frontiers in Big Data

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) models are developed on a learning dataset covering only a small part of the data of interest. If model predictions are accurate for the learning dataset but fail for unseen data then generalization error is considered high. This problem manifests itself within all major sub-fields of ML but is especially relevant in medical applications. Clinical data structures, patient cohorts, and clinical protocols may be highly biased among hospitals such that sampling of representative learning datasets to learn ML models remains a challenge. As ML models exhibit poor predictive performance over data ranges sparsely or not covered by the learning dataset, in this study, we propose a novel method to assess their generalization capability among different hospitals based on the convex hull (CH) overlap between multivariate datasets. To reduce dimensionality effects, we used a two-step approach. First, CH analysis was applied to find mean CH coverage between each of the two datasets, resulting in an upper bound of the prediction range. Second, 4 types of ML models were trained to classify the origin of a dataset (i.e., from which hospital) and to estimate differences in datasets with respect to underlying distributions. To demonstrate the applicability of our method, we used 4 critical-care patient datasets from different hospitals in Germany and USA. We estimated the similarity of these populations and investigated whether ML models developed on one dataset can be reliably applied to another one. We show that the strongest drop in performance was associated with the poor intersection of convex hulls in the corresponding hospitals' datasets and with a high performance of ML methods for dataset discrimination. Hence, we suggest the application of our pipeline as a first tool to assess the transferability of trained models. We emphasize that datasets from different hospitals represent heterogeneous data sources, and the transfer from one database to another should be performed with utmost care to avoid implications during real-world applications of the developed models. Further research is needed to develop methods for the adaptation of ML models to new hospitals. In addition, more work should be aimed at the creation of gold-standard datasets that are large and diverse with data from varied application sites.

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 · 10.3389/fdata.2022.603429

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Substantial overlap in feature ranges between datasets generally suggests strong potential for cross-hospital generalizability.

    “a pattern that generally suggests strong potential for cross-hospital generalizability [72]”

    From Toward generalizable and interpretable machine learning models in healthcare: Insights from ICU outcome predictions (2026) · cites this paper as [72]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says convex-hull overlap can provide a first estimate of whether populations are similar enough for model generalization. But it also says that even extensive overlap may conceal distribution differences that impair generalization; overlap alone does not establish the claimed strong potential. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sharafutdinov, K., Bhat, J. S., Fritsch, S. J., Nikulina, K., E. Samadi, M., Polzin, R., Mayer, H., Marx, G., Bickenbach, J., & Schuppert, A.
Affiliations
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
  • Bayer (Germany) (DE)
  • Universitätsklinikum Aachen (DE)
Corresponding author
Sharafutdinov, Konstantin
Venue
Frontiers in Big Data
Published
2022-10-31
Volume
5
Pages
603429-603429
ISSN
2624-909X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4307870422
Cited by
10
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Big Data (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01ZZ1803M, 01ZZ1803B)
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 › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
convex hull analysis, data heterogeneity, model transferability, generalization error, machine learning in healthcare

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