Comparison of hospital charge prediction models for gastric cancer patients: neural network vs. decision tree models

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In recent years, artificial neural network is advocated in modeling complex multivariable relationships due to its ability of fault tolerance; while decision tree of data mining technique was recommended because of its richness of classification arithmetic rules and appeal of visibility. The aim of our research was to compare the performance of ANN and decision tree models in predicting hospital charges on gastric cancer patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data about hospital charges on 1008 gastric cancer patients and related demographic information were collected from the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University from 2005 to 2007 and preprocessed firstly to select pertinent input variables. Then artificial neural network (ANN) and decision tree models, using same hospital charge output variable and same input variables, were applied to compare the predictive abilities in terms of mean absolute errors and linear correlation coefficients for the training and test datasets. The transfer function in ANN model was sigmoid with 1 hidden layer and three hidden nodes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After preprocess of the data, 12 variables were selected and used as input variables in two types of models. For both the training dataset and the test dataset, mean absolute errors of ANN model were lower than those of decision tree model (1819.197 vs. 2782.423, 1162.279 vs. 3424.608) and linear correlation coefficients of the former model were higher than those of the latter (0.955 vs. 0.866, 0.987 vs. 0.806). The predictive ability and adaptive capacity of ANN model were better than those of decision tree model.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>ANN model performed better in predicting hospital charges of gastric cancer patients of China than did decision tree model.</p

Stratification of the severity of critically ill patients with classification trees

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Development of three classification trees (CT) based on the CART (<it>Classification and Regression Trees</it>), CHAID (<it>Chi-Square Automatic Interaction Detection</it>) and C4.5 methodologies for the calculation of probability of hospital mortality; the comparison of the results with the APACHE II, SAPS II and MPM II-24 scores, and with a model based on multiple logistic regression (LR).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Retrospective study of 2864 patients. Random partition (70:30) into a Development Set (DS) n = 1808 and Validation Set (VS) n = 808. Their properties of discrimination are compared with the ROC curve (AUC CI 95%), Percent of correct classification (PCC CI 95%); and the calibration with the Calibration Curve and the Standardized Mortality Ratio (SMR CI 95%).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>CTs are produced with a different selection of variables and decision rules: CART (5 variables and 8 decision rules), CHAID (7 variables and 15 rules) and C4.5 (6 variables and 10 rules). The common variables were: inotropic therapy, Glasgow, age, (A-a)O2 gradient and antecedent of chronic illness. In VS: all the models achieved acceptable discrimination with AUC above 0.7. CT: CART (0.75(0.71-0.81)), CHAID (0.76(0.72-0.79)) and C4.5 (0.76(0.73-0.80)). PCC: CART (72(69-75)), CHAID (72(69-75)) and C4.5 (76(73-79)). Calibration (SMR) better in the CT: CART (1.04(0.95-1.31)), CHAID (1.06(0.97-1.15) and C4.5 (1.08(0.98-1.16)).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>With different methodologies of CTs, trees are generated with different selection of variables and decision rules. The CTs are easy to interpret, and they stratify the risk of hospital mortality. The CTs should be taken into account for the classification of the prognosis of critically ill patients.</p