Does Deep Learning REALLY Outperform Non-deep Machine Learning for Clinical Prediction on Physiological Time Series?

Authors: Ke Liao, Wei Wang, Armagan Elibol, Lingzhong Meng, Xu Zhao, Nak Young Chong

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2211.06034v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
The summary is not ready yet

Abstract: Machine learning has been widely used in healthcare applications to approximate complex models, for clinical diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. As deep learning has the outstanding ability to extract information from time series, its true capabilities on sparse, irregularly sampled, multivariate, and imbalanced physiological data are not yet fully explored. In this paper, we systematically examine the performance of machine learning models for the clinical prediction task based on the EHR, especially physiological time series. We choose Physionet 2019 challenge public dataset to predict Sepsis outcomes in ICU units. Ten baseline machine learning models are compared, including 3 deep learning methods and 7 non-deep learning methods, commonly used in the clinical prediction domain. Nine evaluation metrics with specific clinical implications are used to assess the performance of models. Besides, we sub-sample training dataset sizes and use learning curve fit to investigate the impact of the training dataset size on the performance of the machine learning models. We also propose the general pre-processing method for the physiology time-series data and use Dice Loss to deal with the dataset imbalanced problem. The results show that deep learning indeed outperforms non-deep learning, but with certain conditions: firstly, evaluating with some particular evaluation metrics (AUROC, AUPRC, Sensitivity, and FNR), but not others; secondly, the training dataset size is large enough (with an estimation of a magnitude of thousands).

Submitted to arXiv on 11 Nov. 2022

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.