updates
This commit is contained in:
parent
213c2ef790
commit
c4ca4a7f8d
5 changed files with 185 additions and 49 deletions
191
chapter2.qmd
191
chapter2.qmd
|
@ -29,17 +29,17 @@ of supervision, whether are not the algorithm can learn incrementally
|
||||||
from an incoming stream of data (batch and online learning), and how
|
from an incoming stream of data (batch and online learning), and how
|
||||||
they generalize (instance-based versus model-based learning)
|
they generalize (instance-based versus model-based learning)
|
||||||
[@debruyne2021]. Rabbani et al. further classified the specific clinical
|
[@debruyne2021]. Rabbani et al. further classified the specific clinical
|
||||||
chemistry uses into five board categories, predicting laboratory test
|
chemistry uses into five broad categories, predicting laboratory test
|
||||||
values, improving laboratory utilization, automating laboratory
|
values, improving laboratory utilization, automating laboratory
|
||||||
processes, promoting precision laboratory test interpretation, and
|
processes, promoting precision laboratory test interpretation, and
|
||||||
improving laboratory medicine information systems [-@rabbani2022].
|
improving laboratory medicine information systems [-@rabbani2022].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Supervised vs Unsupervised Learning
|
### Supervised vs. Unsupervised Learning
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Four important categories can be distinguished based on the amount and
|
Four important categories can be distinguished based on the amount and
|
||||||
type of supervision the models receive during training: supervised,
|
type of supervision the models receive during training: supervised,
|
||||||
unsupervised, semi-supervised, and reinforcement learning. In supervised
|
unsupervised, semi-supervised, and reinforcement learning. Training data
|
||||||
learning, training data are labeled, and data samples are predicted with
|
are labeled in supervised learning, and data samples are predicted with
|
||||||
knowledge about the desired solutions [@debruyne2021]. They are
|
knowledge about the desired solutions [@debruyne2021]. They are
|
||||||
typically used for classification and regression purposes. Some of the
|
typically used for classification and regression purposes. Some of the
|
||||||
essential supervised algorithms are Linear Regression, Logistic
|
essential supervised algorithms are Linear Regression, Logistic
|
||||||
|
@ -54,21 +54,110 @@ visualization, and dimensionality reduction (e.g., principal component
|
||||||
analysis (PCA), kernel PCA, locally linear embedding, t-distributed
|
analysis (PCA), kernel PCA, locally linear embedding, t-distributed
|
||||||
stochastic neighbor embedding), anomaly detection and novelty detection
|
stochastic neighbor embedding), anomaly detection and novelty detection
|
||||||
(e.g., one-class SVM, isolation forest) and association rule learning
|
(e.g., one-class SVM, isolation forest) and association rule learning
|
||||||
(e.g. apriori, eclat). However, some models can deal with partially
|
(e.g., apriori, eclat). However, some models can deal with partially
|
||||||
labeled training data (i.e., semi-supervised learning). At last, in
|
labeled training data (i.e., semi-supervised learning). At last, in
|
||||||
reinforcement learning, an agent (i.e., the learning system) learns what
|
reinforcement learning, an agent (i.e., the learning system) learns what
|
||||||
actions to take to optimize the outcome of a strategy (i.e., a policy)
|
actions to take to optimize the outcome of a strategy (i.e., a policy)
|
||||||
or to get the maximum cumulative reward [@debruyne2021]. This system
|
or to get the maximum cumulative reward [@debruyne2021]. This system
|
||||||
resembles humans learning to ride a bike and can typically be used in
|
resembles humans learning to ride a bike. It can typically be used in
|
||||||
learning games, such as Go, chess, or even poker, or settings where the
|
learning games, such as Go, chess, or even poker, or settings where the
|
||||||
outcome is continuous rather than dichotomous (i.e., right or
|
outcome is continuous rather than dichotomous (i.e., right or
|
||||||
wrong)[@debruyne2021]. The proposed study will use supervised learning,
|
wrong)[@debruyne2021]. The proposed study will use supervised learning,
|
||||||
as the data is labeled and a particular outcome is expected.
|
as the data is labeled, and a particular outcome is expected.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Model Types
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
#### Random Forests
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Random forests are an ensemble learning method that combines multiple
|
||||||
|
decision trees to make predictions or classify data. It was first
|
||||||
|
introduced by Leo Breiman in 2001 and has since gained popularity due to
|
||||||
|
its robustness and accuracy [@liaw2002]. The algorithm creates many
|
||||||
|
decision trees, each trained on a different subset of the data using
|
||||||
|
bootstrap aggregating or "bagging." The random forests algorithm (for
|
||||||
|
both classification and regression) is as follows:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
1. Draw ntree bootstrap samples from the original data.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
2. For each bootstrap sample, grow an unpruned classification or
|
||||||
|
regression tree, with the following modification: at each node,
|
||||||
|
rather than choosing the best split among all predictors, randomly
|
||||||
|
sample mtry of the predictors and choose the best split from among
|
||||||
|
those variables. (Bagging can be considered a special case of random
|
||||||
|
forests obtained when mtry = p, the number of predictors.)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
3. Predict new data by aggregating the predictions of the ntree trees
|
||||||
|
(i.e., majority votes for classification, average for regression)
|
||||||
|
[@liaw2002].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Random forests offer several advantages that make them well-suited for
|
||||||
|
predictive modeling in healthcare:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
1. Robustness: Random forests are less prone to overfitting than
|
||||||
|
individual decision trees. The aggregation of multiple trees helps
|
||||||
|
to reduce the impact of outliers and noise in the data, resulting in
|
||||||
|
more stable and reliable predictions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
2. Variable Importance: Random forests provide estimates of the
|
||||||
|
importance of different features in making predictions. This
|
||||||
|
information aids in feature selection, identifying the most
|
||||||
|
influential factors, and gaining insights into the underlying data
|
||||||
|
relationships.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
3. Handling Complex Data: Random forests can take various data types,
|
||||||
|
including categorical and numerical features, without extensive
|
||||||
|
preprocessing. This flexibility makes them suitable for healthcare
|
||||||
|
datasets often comprising diverse variables [@breiman2001a].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
#### Gradient Boosting
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Gradient boosting machines (GBMs) are an extremely popular machine
|
||||||
|
learning algorithm that have proven successful across many domains and
|
||||||
|
is one of the leading methods for winning Kaggle competitions. Whereas
|
||||||
|
random forests build an ensemble of deep independent trees, GBMs build
|
||||||
|
an ensemble of shallow trees in sequence, with each tree learning and
|
||||||
|
improving on the previous one. Although shallow trees by themselves are
|
||||||
|
relatively weak predictive models, they can be "boosted" to produce a
|
||||||
|
powerful "committee" that, when appropriately tuned, is often hard to
|
||||||
|
beat with other algorithms [@boehmke2020]. Gradient boosting involves
|
||||||
|
the following key steps:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
1. Building an Initial Model: The algorithm creates an initial model,
|
||||||
|
typically a simple decision tree, to make predictions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
2. Calculation of Residuals: The residuals represent the differences
|
||||||
|
between the actual values and the predictions of the current model.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
3. Fitting Subsequent Models: Subsequent weak models are trained to
|
||||||
|
predict the residuals of the previous model. These models are fitted
|
||||||
|
to minimize residual errors, typically using gradient descent
|
||||||
|
optimization.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
4. Ensemble Creation: The predictions of all the weak models are
|
||||||
|
combined by summing them, creating a strong predictive model.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
5. Iterative Improvement: The process is repeated for multiple
|
||||||
|
iterations, with each new model attempting to reduce further the
|
||||||
|
errors made by the previous models[@chen2016].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Gradient boosting offers several advantages that include:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
1. High Predictive Accuracy: By combining multiple weak models,
|
||||||
|
gradient boosting can achieve high predictive accuracy, often
|
||||||
|
outperforming other machine learning algorithms.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
2. Handling Complex Relationships: Gradient boosting can capture
|
||||||
|
complex nonlinear relationships between input and target variables,
|
||||||
|
making it suitable for datasets with intricate patterns.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
3. Robustness to Outliers and Noise: The iterative nature of gradient
|
||||||
|
boosting helps reduce the impact of outliers and noise in the data,
|
||||||
|
leading to more robust predictions [@chen2016].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Machine Learning Workflow
|
### Machine Learning Workflow
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Since this study will focus on supervised learning, the review will
|
Since this study will focus on supervised learning, the review will
|
||||||
focus on that. Machine learning can be broken into three board steps,
|
focus on that. Machine learning can be broken into three broad steps,
|
||||||
data cleaning and processing, training and testing the model, and
|
data cleaning and processing, training and testing the model, and
|
||||||
finally, the model is evaluated, deployed, and monitored
|
finally, the model is evaluated, deployed, and monitored
|
||||||
[@debruyne2021]. In the first phase, data is collected, cleaned, and
|
[@debruyne2021]. In the first phase, data is collected, cleaned, and
|
||||||
|
@ -82,7 +171,7 @@ the rest of the model building. The Training set data is used to develop
|
||||||
feature sets, train our algorithms, tune hyperparameters, compare
|
feature sets, train our algorithms, tune hyperparameters, compare
|
||||||
models, and all the other activities required to choose a final model
|
models, and all the other activities required to choose a final model
|
||||||
(e.g., the model we want to put into production) [@boehmke2020]. Once
|
(e.g., the model we want to put into production) [@boehmke2020]. Once
|
||||||
the final model is chosen, the test set data is used to estimate an
|
the final model is selected, the test set data is used to estimate an
|
||||||
unbiased assessment of the model's performance, which we refer to as the
|
unbiased assessment of the model's performance, which we refer to as the
|
||||||
generalization error [@boehmke2020]. Most time (as much as 80%) is
|
generalization error [@boehmke2020]. Most time (as much as 80%) is
|
||||||
invested into the data processes stage. After feature engineering, an ML
|
invested into the data processes stage. After feature engineering, an ML
|
||||||
|
@ -101,7 +190,7 @@ primarily based on goodness-of-fit tests and the assessment of
|
||||||
residuals. Unfortunately, misleading conclusions may follow from
|
residuals. Unfortunately, misleading conclusions may follow from
|
||||||
predictive models that pass these assessments [@breiman2001]. Today, it
|
predictive models that pass these assessments [@breiman2001]. Today, it
|
||||||
has become widely accepted that a more sound approach to assessing model
|
has become widely accepted that a more sound approach to assessing model
|
||||||
performance is to assess the predictive accuracy via loss functions
|
performance is to determine the predictive accuracy via loss functions
|
||||||
[@boehmke2020]. *Loss functions* are metrics that compare the predicted
|
[@boehmke2020]. *Loss functions* are metrics that compare the predicted
|
||||||
values to the actual value (the output of a loss function is often
|
values to the actual value (the output of a loss function is often
|
||||||
referred to as the error or pseudo residual). When performing resampling
|
referred to as the error or pseudo residual). When performing resampling
|
||||||
|
@ -110,54 +199,66 @@ the actual target value. The overall validation error of the model is
|
||||||
computed by aggregating the errors across the entire validation data set
|
computed by aggregating the errors across the entire validation data set
|
||||||
[@boehmke2020]
|
[@boehmke2020]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.<!--# should I talk about Model types ?-->
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Machine Learning in the Clinical Laboratory
|
### Machine Learning in the Clinical Laboratory
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<!--# Table needs to be modified -->
|
Rabbani et al. performed a comprehensive study of the current state of
|
||||||
|
machine learning in laboratory medicine [-@rabbani2022]. This study
|
||||||
|
revealed several exciting applications, including predicting laboratory
|
||||||
|
test values, improving laboratory utilization, automating laboratory
|
||||||
|
processes, promoting precision laboratory test interpretation, and
|
||||||
|
improving laboratory medicine information systems. In these studies,
|
||||||
|
tree-based learning algorithms and neural networks often performed best.
|
||||||
|
@tbl-lab_ml displays the overview of their research.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
| **Author and Year** | **Objective and Machine Learning Task** | **Best Model** | **Major Themes** |
|
| **Author and Year** | **Objective and Machine Learning Task** | **Best Model** | **Major Themes** |
|
||||||
|---------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|------------------|
|
|:-----------------|:-----------------|:-----------------|:-----------------|
|
||||||
| Azarkhish (2012) | Predict iron deficiency anemia and serum iron levels from CBC indices | Neural Network | Prediction |
|
| Azarkhish (2012) | Predict iron deficiency anemia and serum iron levels from CBC indices | Neural Network | Prediction |
|
||||||
| Cao (2012) | Triage manual review for urinalysis samples | Tree-based | Automation |
|
| Cao (2012) | Triage manual review for urinalysis samples | Tree-based | Automation |
|
||||||
| Yang (2013) | Predict normal reference ranges of ESR for various laboratories based on geographic and other clinical features | Neural Network | Interpretation |
|
| Yang (2013) | Predict normal reference ranges of ESR for various laboratories based on geographic and other clinical features | Neural Network | Interpretation |
|
||||||
|
| Lidbury (2015) | Predict liver function test results from other tests in the panel, highlighting redundancy in the liver function panel | Tree-based | Prediction, Utilization |
|
||||||
|
| Demirci (2016) | Classify whether critical lab result is valid or invalid using other lab values and clinical information | Neural Network | Automation, Interpretation, Validation |
|
||||||
|
| Luo (2016) | Predict ferritin from other tests in iron panel | Tree-based | Prediction, Utilization |
|
||||||
|
| Poole (2016) | Create personalized reference ranges that take into account patients\' diagnoses | Unsupervised learning | Interpretation |
|
||||||
|
| Parr (2018) | Automate mapping of Veterans Affair laboratory data to LOINC codes | Tree-based | Information systems, Automation |
|
||||||
|
| Wilkes (2018) | Classify urine steroid profiles as normal or abnormal, and further interpret into specific disease processes | Tree-based | Interpretation, Automation |
|
||||||
|
| Fillmore (2019) | Automate mapping of Veterans Affair laboratory data to LOINC codes | Tree-based | Information systems, Automation |
|
||||||
|
| Lee (2019) | Predict LDL-C levels from a limited lipid panel more accurately than current gold standard equations | Neural Network | Interpretation, Prediction |
|
||||||
|
| Xu (2019) | Identify redundant laboratory tests and predict their results as normal or abnormal | Tree-based | Prediction, Utilization |
|
||||||
|
| Islam (2020) | Use prior ordering patterns to create an algorithm that can recommend best practice tests for specific diagnoses | Neural Network | Utilization |
|
||||||
|
| Peng (2020) | Interpret newborn screening assays based on gestational age and other clinical information to reduce false positives | Tree-based | Interpretation, Utilization |
|
||||||
|
| Wang (2020) | Automatically verify if lab test result is valid or invalid | Tree-based | Validation, Automation |
|
||||||
|
| Dunn (2021) | Predict laboratory test results from wearable data | Tree-based | Prediction |
|
||||||
|
| Fang (2021) | Classify blood specimen as clotted or not clotted based on coagulation indices | Neural Network | Quality control |
|
||||||
|
| Farrell (2021) | Automatically identify mislabelled laboratory samples | Neural Network | Quality control, Automation |
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
: Summary of characteristics of machine learning algorithms
|
: Summary of characteristics of machine learning algorithms
|
||||||
[@rabbani2022]. {#tbl-lab_ml}
|
[@rabbani2022]. {#tbl-lab_ml}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<!--# Need to fill in this section -->
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Reflex Testing
|
## Reflex Testing
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The laboratory diagnosis of thyroid dysfunction relies on the
|
The laboratory diagnosis of thyroid dysfunction relies on the
|
||||||
measurement of circulating concentrations of thyrotropin (TSH), free
|
measurement of circulating concentrations of thyrotropin (TSH), free
|
||||||
thyroxine (fT4), and, in some cases, free triiodothyronine (fT3). TSH
|
thyroxine (fT4), and, in some cases, free triiodothyronine (fT3). TSH
|
||||||
measurement is generally regarded as the most sensitive initial
|
measurement is the most sensitive initial laboratory test for screening
|
||||||
laboratory test for screening individuals for thyroid hormone
|
individuals for thyroid hormone abnormalities [@woodmansee2018]. TSH and
|
||||||
abnormalities [@woodmansee2018]. TSH and fT4 have a complex, nonlinear
|
fT4 have a complex, nonlinear relationship, such that small changes in
|
||||||
relationship, such that small changes in fT4 result in relatively large
|
fT4 result in relatively significant changes in TSH [@plebani2020]. Many
|
||||||
changes in TSH [@plebani2020]. Many clinicians and laboratories check
|
clinicians and laboratories check TSH alone as the initial test for
|
||||||
TSH alone as the initial test for thyroid problems and then only add a
|
thyroid problems and only add a Free T4 measurement if the TSH is
|
||||||
Free T4 measurement if the TSH is abnormal (outside the laboratory
|
abnormal (outside the laboratory's normal reference range). This is
|
||||||
normal reference range), this is known as reflex testing
|
known as reflex testing [@woodmansee2018]. Reflex testing became
|
||||||
[@woodmansee2018]. Reflex testing became possible with the advent of
|
possible with the advent of laboratory information systems (LIS) that
|
||||||
laboratory information systems (LIS) that were sufficiently flexible to
|
were sufficiently flexible to permit modification of existing test
|
||||||
permit modification of existing test requests at various stages of the
|
requests at various stages of the analytical process [@srivastava2010].
|
||||||
analytical process [@srivastava2010]. Reflex testing is widely used, the
|
Reflex testing is widely used, the principal aim being to optimize the
|
||||||
major aim being to optimize the use of laboratory tests. However the
|
use of laboratory tests. However, the common practice of reflex testing
|
||||||
common practice of reflex testing relies simply on hard coded rules that
|
relies simply on hard-coded rules that allow no flexibility. For
|
||||||
allow no flexibility. For instance in the case of TSH, free T4 will be
|
instance, in the case of TSH, free T4 will be added to the patient order
|
||||||
added to the patient order whenever the value falls outside of the
|
whenever the value falls outside the established laboratory reference
|
||||||
established laboratory reference range. This bring into the fold the
|
range. This brings into the fold the issue that the thresholds used to
|
||||||
issue that the thresholds used to trigger reflex addition of tests vary
|
trigger reflex addition of tests vary widely. In a study by Murphy, he
|
||||||
widely. In a study by Murphy he found the hypocalcaemic threshold to
|
found the hypocalcaemic threshold to trigger magnesium measurement
|
||||||
trigger magnesium measurement varied from 1.50 mmol/L up to 2.20 mmol/L
|
varied from 1.50 mmol/L up to 2.20 mmol/L [-@murphy2021]. Even allowing
|
||||||
[-@murphy2021]. Even allowing for differences in the nature, size and
|
for differences in the nature, size, and staffing of hospital
|
||||||
staffing of hospital laboratories, and populations served, the extent of
|
laboratories and populations served, the extent of the observed
|
||||||
the observed variation invites scrutiny [@murphy2021].
|
variation invites scrutiny [@murphy2021].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<!--# insert table and study from strivastava about hypo/hyper thyroid -->
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<!--# data from woodmansee and plebani -->
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
LIT REVIEW TO BE EXPANDED
|
|
||||||
|
|
BIN
images/image-1805758049.png
Normal file
BIN
images/image-1805758049.png
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
After Width: | Height: | Size: 54 KiB |
BIN
images/image-2011836124.png
Normal file
BIN
images/image-2011836124.png
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
After Width: | Height: | Size: 58 KiB |
BIN
images/image-754985035.png
Normal file
BIN
images/image-754985035.png
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
After Width: | Height: | Size: 58 KiB |
|
@ -300,3 +300,38 @@ Publisher: Endeavor Business Media},
|
||||||
Type: dataset
|
Type: dataset
|
||||||
DOI: 10.13026/S6N6-XD98}
|
DOI: 10.13026/S6N6-XD98}
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@article{liaw2002,
|
||||||
|
title = {Classi{fi}cation and Regression by randomForest},
|
||||||
|
author = {Liaw, Andy and Wiener, Matthew},
|
||||||
|
year = {2002},
|
||||||
|
date = {2002},
|
||||||
|
volume = {2},
|
||||||
|
langid = {en}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@article{breiman2001a,
|
||||||
|
author = {Breiman, Leo},
|
||||||
|
year = {2001},
|
||||||
|
date = {2001},
|
||||||
|
journal = {Machine Learning},
|
||||||
|
pages = {5--32},
|
||||||
|
volume = {45},
|
||||||
|
number = {1},
|
||||||
|
doi = {10.1023/a:1010933404324},
|
||||||
|
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@inproceedings{chen2016,
|
||||||
|
title = {XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System},
|
||||||
|
author = {Chen, Tianqi and Guestrin, Carlos},
|
||||||
|
year = {2016},
|
||||||
|
month = {08},
|
||||||
|
date = {2016-08-13},
|
||||||
|
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
|
||||||
|
pages = {785{\textendash}794},
|
||||||
|
series = {KDD '16},
|
||||||
|
doi = {10.1145/2939672.2939785},
|
||||||
|
url = {https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2939672.2939785},
|
||||||
|
address = {New York, NY, USA}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue