Which model may be best for outcome of a surgery?
$begingroup$
New to data science and am trying to be a self-starter and implement advanced data analytics in my subspecialty of surgery. Below is a description of my data set. I know that I will have to explore multiple methods, but wanted to get your take on which you think may be best. I will most likely be using R to achieve this analysis.
- Have a data set with about 200 patients (rows)
- Each patient has about 10-15 variables (preoperative and intraoperative)
- Each patient has undergone either nonoperative or operative management
- Success in nonoperative or operative management is determined by a questionnaire that patients fill out 1 year after they are seen. This questionnaire gives a binary outcome on whether they (1) Benefited or (2) Did not Benefit from the surgery.
My questions for the study are as follows:
- In the surgery group, I am trying to find out which variables lead to patients (1) Benefit vs (2) Do not benefit from surgery, and create a model which can better help predict which patients we can operate on (I have left out some details such as patient population, type of surgery, etc).
- In the second study, I would like to determine which patients we should operate on. In other words, I would like to find out which preoperative characteristics make some patients more likely to benefit from (1) Operative treatment vs (2) Nonoperative treatment and in this case the outcome will also be binary from the questionnaire.
I have tried linear and logistic regressions for this which have not been very good, hence why I am trying to learn more advanced models.
Models which are easier to comprehend by clinicians are more valuable which is why I haven't delved into neural nets. I appreciate any and all advice that can be provided. In addition, if I expand this data set to 600 people, would you use another model? I don't have access to large servers so most of this will be done on my laptop though I can use online resources if necessary (Azure etc).
Thank you all for your help and input.
machine-learning predictive-modeling model-selection
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
$endgroup$
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
$begingroup$
New to data science and am trying to be a self-starter and implement advanced data analytics in my subspecialty of surgery. Below is a description of my data set. I know that I will have to explore multiple methods, but wanted to get your take on which you think may be best. I will most likely be using R to achieve this analysis.
- Have a data set with about 200 patients (rows)
- Each patient has about 10-15 variables (preoperative and intraoperative)
- Each patient has undergone either nonoperative or operative management
- Success in nonoperative or operative management is determined by a questionnaire that patients fill out 1 year after they are seen. This questionnaire gives a binary outcome on whether they (1) Benefited or (2) Did not Benefit from the surgery.
My questions for the study are as follows:
- In the surgery group, I am trying to find out which variables lead to patients (1) Benefit vs (2) Do not benefit from surgery, and create a model which can better help predict which patients we can operate on (I have left out some details such as patient population, type of surgery, etc).
- In the second study, I would like to determine which patients we should operate on. In other words, I would like to find out which preoperative characteristics make some patients more likely to benefit from (1) Operative treatment vs (2) Nonoperative treatment and in this case the outcome will also be binary from the questionnaire.
I have tried linear and logistic regressions for this which have not been very good, hence why I am trying to learn more advanced models.
Models which are easier to comprehend by clinicians are more valuable which is why I haven't delved into neural nets. I appreciate any and all advice that can be provided. In addition, if I expand this data set to 600 people, would you use another model? I don't have access to large servers so most of this will be done on my laptop though I can use online resources if necessary (Azure etc).
Thank you all for your help and input.
machine-learning predictive-modeling model-selection
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
$endgroup$
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
$begingroup$
You only have 200 data points with 15 features. Please note that deep learning is usually applied to 10,000s of training examples and 100s of features.
$endgroup$
– Martin Thoma
Dec 17 '18 at 6:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
New to data science and am trying to be a self-starter and implement advanced data analytics in my subspecialty of surgery. Below is a description of my data set. I know that I will have to explore multiple methods, but wanted to get your take on which you think may be best. I will most likely be using R to achieve this analysis.
- Have a data set with about 200 patients (rows)
- Each patient has about 10-15 variables (preoperative and intraoperative)
- Each patient has undergone either nonoperative or operative management
- Success in nonoperative or operative management is determined by a questionnaire that patients fill out 1 year after they are seen. This questionnaire gives a binary outcome on whether they (1) Benefited or (2) Did not Benefit from the surgery.
My questions for the study are as follows:
- In the surgery group, I am trying to find out which variables lead to patients (1) Benefit vs (2) Do not benefit from surgery, and create a model which can better help predict which patients we can operate on (I have left out some details such as patient population, type of surgery, etc).
- In the second study, I would like to determine which patients we should operate on. In other words, I would like to find out which preoperative characteristics make some patients more likely to benefit from (1) Operative treatment vs (2) Nonoperative treatment and in this case the outcome will also be binary from the questionnaire.
I have tried linear and logistic regressions for this which have not been very good, hence why I am trying to learn more advanced models.
Models which are easier to comprehend by clinicians are more valuable which is why I haven't delved into neural nets. I appreciate any and all advice that can be provided. In addition, if I expand this data set to 600 people, would you use another model? I don't have access to large servers so most of this will be done on my laptop though I can use online resources if necessary (Azure etc).
Thank you all for your help and input.
machine-learning predictive-modeling model-selection
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
$endgroup$
New to data science and am trying to be a self-starter and implement advanced data analytics in my subspecialty of surgery. Below is a description of my data set. I know that I will have to explore multiple methods, but wanted to get your take on which you think may be best. I will most likely be using R to achieve this analysis.
- Have a data set with about 200 patients (rows)
- Each patient has about 10-15 variables (preoperative and intraoperative)
- Each patient has undergone either nonoperative or operative management
- Success in nonoperative or operative management is determined by a questionnaire that patients fill out 1 year after they are seen. This questionnaire gives a binary outcome on whether they (1) Benefited or (2) Did not Benefit from the surgery.
My questions for the study are as follows:
- In the surgery group, I am trying to find out which variables lead to patients (1) Benefit vs (2) Do not benefit from surgery, and create a model which can better help predict which patients we can operate on (I have left out some details such as patient population, type of surgery, etc).
- In the second study, I would like to determine which patients we should operate on. In other words, I would like to find out which preoperative characteristics make some patients more likely to benefit from (1) Operative treatment vs (2) Nonoperative treatment and in this case the outcome will also be binary from the questionnaire.
I have tried linear and logistic regressions for this which have not been very good, hence why I am trying to learn more advanced models.
Models which are easier to comprehend by clinicians are more valuable which is why I haven't delved into neural nets. I appreciate any and all advice that can be provided. In addition, if I expand this data set to 600 people, would you use another model? I don't have access to large servers so most of this will be done on my laptop though I can use online resources if necessary (Azure etc).
Thank you all for your help and input.
machine-learning predictive-modeling model-selection
machine-learning predictive-modeling model-selection
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
asked Sep 16 '18 at 23:02
AYPAYP
63
63
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 2 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
$begingroup$
You only have 200 data points with 15 features. Please note that deep learning is usually applied to 10,000s of training examples and 100s of features.
$endgroup$
– Martin Thoma
Dec 17 '18 at 6:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You only have 200 data points with 15 features. Please note that deep learning is usually applied to 10,000s of training examples and 100s of features.
$endgroup$
– Martin Thoma
Dec 17 '18 at 6:38
$begingroup$
You only have 200 data points with 15 features. Please note that deep learning is usually applied to 10,000s of training examples and 100s of features.
$endgroup$
– Martin Thoma
Dec 17 '18 at 6:38
$begingroup$
You only have 200 data points with 15 features. Please note that deep learning is usually applied to 10,000s of training examples and 100s of features.
$endgroup$
– Martin Thoma
Dec 17 '18 at 6:38
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Question 1: I would propose Decision Trees as a first thing you should look into, as they are easy to implement and the results are straightforward to interpret.
You will end up with a tree-structure, where the nodes hold intervals/values of your variables. At each node, the tree tries to split your data most efficiently into your binary classifications $C_1$ and $C_2$. Thus, in the end, you will be able to extract most important features in your variables at the top of the tree. A typical measure of "efficiency" when selecting attributes is Entropy.
Question 2: I think it is also solved with the above method. For each node of the tree you know the amount of $C_1$ and $C_2$ classifications on the left and on the right. Assume your attribute in the node is "Has diabetes". Your data (and thus the tree) tells you, 100 out of 110 patients "failed" the operation if the person had diabetes. Thus, you can give an estimate about how certain attributed contribute to success of your operations, and conclude it would not make much sense to operate the given person.
Nonetheless, always be careful about how you interpret the results. You should not try to interpret attributes that split small subgroups, since this can easily lead to false assumptions about real-world behaviors.
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for your response, Andre. Would testing this data on a blinded set from another institution make this more validated since if it performs well it would be more generalizable? Further, do you think Random Forest with or without bootstrapping make this model more robust or do you think the N (N from 200-500 with 12-15 variables for each N) I have in my data set is not large enough for such a method.
$endgroup$
– AYP
Sep 18 '18 at 5:17
$begingroup$
Validation through blinded set: Good idea! Random forests can improve your outcome, while making your results harder to interpret. Saying what's better from this point is very hard, since it highly depends on how well your data splits. Since Decision Trees are easy to implement, I would try them out (with pruning to combat overfitting), validate through your test set and see how it performs. Regarding $N$, I just can say the same: If the data splits nicely, 200 is OK; if that does not happen, even 500 can be too little. If this does not work, you can try Random forests.
$endgroup$
– André
Sep 18 '18 at 8:17
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "557"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38355%2fwhich-model-may-be-best-for-outcome-of-a-surgery%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Question 1: I would propose Decision Trees as a first thing you should look into, as they are easy to implement and the results are straightforward to interpret.
You will end up with a tree-structure, where the nodes hold intervals/values of your variables. At each node, the tree tries to split your data most efficiently into your binary classifications $C_1$ and $C_2$. Thus, in the end, you will be able to extract most important features in your variables at the top of the tree. A typical measure of "efficiency" when selecting attributes is Entropy.
Question 2: I think it is also solved with the above method. For each node of the tree you know the amount of $C_1$ and $C_2$ classifications on the left and on the right. Assume your attribute in the node is "Has diabetes". Your data (and thus the tree) tells you, 100 out of 110 patients "failed" the operation if the person had diabetes. Thus, you can give an estimate about how certain attributed contribute to success of your operations, and conclude it would not make much sense to operate the given person.
Nonetheless, always be careful about how you interpret the results. You should not try to interpret attributes that split small subgroups, since this can easily lead to false assumptions about real-world behaviors.
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for your response, Andre. Would testing this data on a blinded set from another institution make this more validated since if it performs well it would be more generalizable? Further, do you think Random Forest with or without bootstrapping make this model more robust or do you think the N (N from 200-500 with 12-15 variables for each N) I have in my data set is not large enough for such a method.
$endgroup$
– AYP
Sep 18 '18 at 5:17
$begingroup$
Validation through blinded set: Good idea! Random forests can improve your outcome, while making your results harder to interpret. Saying what's better from this point is very hard, since it highly depends on how well your data splits. Since Decision Trees are easy to implement, I would try them out (with pruning to combat overfitting), validate through your test set and see how it performs. Regarding $N$, I just can say the same: If the data splits nicely, 200 is OK; if that does not happen, even 500 can be too little. If this does not work, you can try Random forests.
$endgroup$
– André
Sep 18 '18 at 8:17
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Question 1: I would propose Decision Trees as a first thing you should look into, as they are easy to implement and the results are straightforward to interpret.
You will end up with a tree-structure, where the nodes hold intervals/values of your variables. At each node, the tree tries to split your data most efficiently into your binary classifications $C_1$ and $C_2$. Thus, in the end, you will be able to extract most important features in your variables at the top of the tree. A typical measure of "efficiency" when selecting attributes is Entropy.
Question 2: I think it is also solved with the above method. For each node of the tree you know the amount of $C_1$ and $C_2$ classifications on the left and on the right. Assume your attribute in the node is "Has diabetes". Your data (and thus the tree) tells you, 100 out of 110 patients "failed" the operation if the person had diabetes. Thus, you can give an estimate about how certain attributed contribute to success of your operations, and conclude it would not make much sense to operate the given person.
Nonetheless, always be careful about how you interpret the results. You should not try to interpret attributes that split small subgroups, since this can easily lead to false assumptions about real-world behaviors.
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for your response, Andre. Would testing this data on a blinded set from another institution make this more validated since if it performs well it would be more generalizable? Further, do you think Random Forest with or without bootstrapping make this model more robust or do you think the N (N from 200-500 with 12-15 variables for each N) I have in my data set is not large enough for such a method.
$endgroup$
– AYP
Sep 18 '18 at 5:17
$begingroup$
Validation through blinded set: Good idea! Random forests can improve your outcome, while making your results harder to interpret. Saying what's better from this point is very hard, since it highly depends on how well your data splits. Since Decision Trees are easy to implement, I would try them out (with pruning to combat overfitting), validate through your test set and see how it performs. Regarding $N$, I just can say the same: If the data splits nicely, 200 is OK; if that does not happen, even 500 can be too little. If this does not work, you can try Random forests.
$endgroup$
– André
Sep 18 '18 at 8:17
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Question 1: I would propose Decision Trees as a first thing you should look into, as they are easy to implement and the results are straightforward to interpret.
You will end up with a tree-structure, where the nodes hold intervals/values of your variables. At each node, the tree tries to split your data most efficiently into your binary classifications $C_1$ and $C_2$. Thus, in the end, you will be able to extract most important features in your variables at the top of the tree. A typical measure of "efficiency" when selecting attributes is Entropy.
Question 2: I think it is also solved with the above method. For each node of the tree you know the amount of $C_1$ and $C_2$ classifications on the left and on the right. Assume your attribute in the node is "Has diabetes". Your data (and thus the tree) tells you, 100 out of 110 patients "failed" the operation if the person had diabetes. Thus, you can give an estimate about how certain attributed contribute to success of your operations, and conclude it would not make much sense to operate the given person.
Nonetheless, always be careful about how you interpret the results. You should not try to interpret attributes that split small subgroups, since this can easily lead to false assumptions about real-world behaviors.
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
$endgroup$
Question 1: I would propose Decision Trees as a first thing you should look into, as they are easy to implement and the results are straightforward to interpret.
You will end up with a tree-structure, where the nodes hold intervals/values of your variables. At each node, the tree tries to split your data most efficiently into your binary classifications $C_1$ and $C_2$. Thus, in the end, you will be able to extract most important features in your variables at the top of the tree. A typical measure of "efficiency" when selecting attributes is Entropy.
Question 2: I think it is also solved with the above method. For each node of the tree you know the amount of $C_1$ and $C_2$ classifications on the left and on the right. Assume your attribute in the node is "Has diabetes". Your data (and thus the tree) tells you, 100 out of 110 patients "failed" the operation if the person had diabetes. Thus, you can give an estimate about how certain attributed contribute to success of your operations, and conclude it would not make much sense to operate the given person.
Nonetheless, always be careful about how you interpret the results. You should not try to interpret attributes that split small subgroups, since this can easily lead to false assumptions about real-world behaviors.
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
answered Sep 17 '18 at 11:28
AndréAndré
41810
41810
$begingroup$
Thanks for your response, Andre. Would testing this data on a blinded set from another institution make this more validated since if it performs well it would be more generalizable? Further, do you think Random Forest with or without bootstrapping make this model more robust or do you think the N (N from 200-500 with 12-15 variables for each N) I have in my data set is not large enough for such a method.
$endgroup$
– AYP
Sep 18 '18 at 5:17
$begingroup$
Validation through blinded set: Good idea! Random forests can improve your outcome, while making your results harder to interpret. Saying what's better from this point is very hard, since it highly depends on how well your data splits. Since Decision Trees are easy to implement, I would try them out (with pruning to combat overfitting), validate through your test set and see how it performs. Regarding $N$, I just can say the same: If the data splits nicely, 200 is OK; if that does not happen, even 500 can be too little. If this does not work, you can try Random forests.
$endgroup$
– André
Sep 18 '18 at 8:17
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thanks for your response, Andre. Would testing this data on a blinded set from another institution make this more validated since if it performs well it would be more generalizable? Further, do you think Random Forest with or without bootstrapping make this model more robust or do you think the N (N from 200-500 with 12-15 variables for each N) I have in my data set is not large enough for such a method.
$endgroup$
– AYP
Sep 18 '18 at 5:17
$begingroup$
Validation through blinded set: Good idea! Random forests can improve your outcome, while making your results harder to interpret. Saying what's better from this point is very hard, since it highly depends on how well your data splits. Since Decision Trees are easy to implement, I would try them out (with pruning to combat overfitting), validate through your test set and see how it performs. Regarding $N$, I just can say the same: If the data splits nicely, 200 is OK; if that does not happen, even 500 can be too little. If this does not work, you can try Random forests.
$endgroup$
– André
Sep 18 '18 at 8:17
$begingroup$
Thanks for your response, Andre. Would testing this data on a blinded set from another institution make this more validated since if it performs well it would be more generalizable? Further, do you think Random Forest with or without bootstrapping make this model more robust or do you think the N (N from 200-500 with 12-15 variables for each N) I have in my data set is not large enough for such a method.
$endgroup$
– AYP
Sep 18 '18 at 5:17
$begingroup$
Thanks for your response, Andre. Would testing this data on a blinded set from another institution make this more validated since if it performs well it would be more generalizable? Further, do you think Random Forest with or without bootstrapping make this model more robust or do you think the N (N from 200-500 with 12-15 variables for each N) I have in my data set is not large enough for such a method.
$endgroup$
– AYP
Sep 18 '18 at 5:17
$begingroup$
Validation through blinded set: Good idea! Random forests can improve your outcome, while making your results harder to interpret. Saying what's better from this point is very hard, since it highly depends on how well your data splits. Since Decision Trees are easy to implement, I would try them out (with pruning to combat overfitting), validate through your test set and see how it performs. Regarding $N$, I just can say the same: If the data splits nicely, 200 is OK; if that does not happen, even 500 can be too little. If this does not work, you can try Random forests.
$endgroup$
– André
Sep 18 '18 at 8:17
$begingroup$
Validation through blinded set: Good idea! Random forests can improve your outcome, while making your results harder to interpret. Saying what's better from this point is very hard, since it highly depends on how well your data splits. Since Decision Trees are easy to implement, I would try them out (with pruning to combat overfitting), validate through your test set and see how it performs. Regarding $N$, I just can say the same: If the data splits nicely, 200 is OK; if that does not happen, even 500 can be too little. If this does not work, you can try Random forests.
$endgroup$
– André
Sep 18 '18 at 8:17
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Data Science Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38355%2fwhich-model-may-be-best-for-outcome-of-a-surgery%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
You only have 200 data points with 15 features. Please note that deep learning is usually applied to 10,000s of training examples and 100s of features.
$endgroup$
– Martin Thoma
Dec 17 '18 at 6:38