Advertisement

Using Machine Learning to Plan Rehabilitation for Home Care Clients: Beyond “Black-Box” Predictions

  • Mu ZhuEmail author
  • Lu Cheng
  • Joshua J. Armstrong
  • Jeff W. Poss
  • John P. Hirdes
  • Paul Stolee
Part of the Intelligent Systems Reference Library book series (ISRL, volume 56)

Abstract

Resistance to adopting machine-learning algorithms in clinical practice may be due to a perception that these are “black-box” techniques and incompatible with decision-making based on evidence and clinical experience. We believe this resistance is unfortunate, given the increasing availability of large databases containing assessment information that could benefit from machine-learning and data-mining techniques, thereby providing a new and important source of evidence upon which to base clinical decisions. We have focused our investigation on the clinical applications of machine-learning algorithms on older persons in a home care rehabilitation setting. Data for this research were obtained from standardized client assessments using the comprehensive RAI-Home Care (RAI-HC) assessment instrument. Our work has shown that machine-learning algorithms can produce better decisions than standard clinical protocols. More importantly, we have shown that machine-learning algorithms can do much more than make “black-box” predictions; they can generate important new clinical and scientific insights. These insights can be used to make better decisions about treatment plans for patients and about resource allocation for healthcare services, resulting in better outcomes for patients, and in a more efficient and effective healthcare system.

Keywords

Support Vector Machine Home Care Frailty Index Ensemble Approach Random Forest Algorithm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The InfoRehab project is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). We thank Chloe Wu for her assistance with the management of data.

References

  1. 1.
    Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE T Automat Contr 19:716–723MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Armstrong JJ, Stolee P, Hirdes JP, Poss JW (2010) Examining three frailty conceptualizations in their ability to predict negative outcomes for home care clients. Age Ageing 39:755–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bayes T (1763) An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Phil Trans Roy Soc 53:370–418Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Begg R, Kamruzzaman J (2005) A machine learning approach for automated recognition of movement patterns using basic, kinetic and kinematic gait data. J Biomech 38:401–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bishop CM (2006) Pattern recognition and machine learning. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boser B, Guyon I, Vapnik VN (1992) A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In: Proceeding 5th annual workshop computer learn theory. ACM Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Borrie MJ, Stolee P, Knoefel FD, Wells JL, Seabrook JA (2005) Current best practices in geriatric rehabilitation in Canada. Geriatr Today Can J Geriatr Med Geriatr Psych 8:148–153Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Breiman L (1996) Bagging predictors. Mach Learn 24:123–140MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Breiman L (2001) Statistical modeling: the two cultures. Stat Sci 16:199–231MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Colombo M, Guaita A, Cottino M, Previderé G, Ferrari D, Vitali S (2004) The impact of cognitive impairment on the rehabilitation process in geriatrics. Arch Gerontol Geriatr Suppl 9:85–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cover TM, Hart PE (1967) Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE T Inform Theory 13:21–27CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cristianini N, Shawe-Taylor J (2002) An introduction to Support Vector Machines and Other Kernel-Based Learning Methods. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Diwan S, Shugarman LR, Fries BE (2004) Problem identification and care plan responses in a home and community-based services program. Med Care 23:193–211Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Efron B (1979) Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat 7:1–26MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Efron B, Hastie TJ, Johnstone IM, Tibshirani RJ (2004) Least angle regression (with discussion). Ann Stat 32:407–499MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fan J, Li R (2001) Variable selection via nonconcave penalized likelihood and its oracle properties. J Amer Statist Assoc 96:1348–1360MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Freund Y, Schapire R (1996) Experiments with a new boosting algorithm. Machine Learning Proc 13th Int Conf. Morgan Kauffman, San Francisco, pp 148–156Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Friedman JH (2001) Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann Stat 29:1189–1232CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Friedman JH, Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ (2000) Additive logistic regression: A statistical view of boosting. Ann Stat 28:337–407MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ghisla MK, Cossi S, Timpini A, Baroni F, Facchi E, Marengoni A (2007) Predictors of successful rehabilitation in geriatric patients: subgroup analysis of patients with cognitive impairment. Aging Clin Exp Res 19:417–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gill PE, Murray W, Wright MH (1986) Practical optimization. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gilmore S, Hofmann-Wellenhof R, Soyer HP (2010) A support vector machine for decision support in melanoma recognition. Exp Dermatol 19:830–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hanks RA, Rapport LJ, Millis SR, Deshpande SA (1999) Measures of executive functioning as predictors of functional ability and social integration in a rehabilitation sample. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 80:1030–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Harrison RF, Kennedy RL (2005) Artificial neural network models for prediction of acute coronary syndromes using clinical data from the time of presentation. Ann Emerg Med 46:431–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ, Friedman JF (2001) The elements of statistical learning: data mining, Inference and Prediction. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hepburn B (2010) Healthcare in Ontario is cracking under stress. Toronto Star, AugustGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hershkovitz A, Kalandariov Z, Hermush V, Weiss R, Brill S (2007) Factors affecting short-term rehabilitation outcomes of disabled elderly patients with proximal hip fracture. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 88:916–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hirdes JP, Fries BE, Morris JN, Steel K, Mor V, Frijters DH et al (1999) Integrated health information systems based on the RAI/MDS series of instruments. Health Manage Forum 12:30–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hirdes JP, Frijters D, Teare G (2003) The MDS-CHESS scale: a new measure to predict mortality in institutionalized older people. J Am Geriatr Soc 51:96–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hirdes JP, Fries BE, Morris JN, Ikegami N, Zimmerman D, Dalby DM et al (2004) Home Care Quality Indicators (HCQIs) based on the MDS-HC. Gerontologist 44:665–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hirdes JP, Poss JW, Curtin-Telegdi N (2008) The method for assigning priority levels (MAPLe): a new decision-support system for allocating home care resources. BMC Med 6:9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ji SY, Smith R, Huynh T, Najarian K (2009) A comparative analysis of multi-level computer-assisted decision-making systems for traumatic injuries. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 9:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kulminski AM, Ukraintseva SV, Kulminskaya IV, Arbeev KG, Land K, Yashin AI (2008) Cumulative deficits better characterize susceptibility to death in elderly people than phenotypic frailty: lessons from the cardiovascular health study. J Am Geriatr Soc 56:898–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lau HY, Tong KY, Zhu H (2009) Support vector machine for classification of walking conditions of persons after stroke with dropped foot. Hum Mov Sci 28:504–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Landi F, Tua E, Onder G, Carrara B, Sgadari A, Rinaldi C et al (2000) Minimum data set for home care: a valid instrument to assess frail older people living in the community. Med Care 38:1184–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lucas P (2004) Bayesian analysis, pattern analysis, and data mining in healthcare. Curr Opin Crit Care 10:399–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized Linear Models. Chapman and Hall, Boca RatonCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Meier L, van de Geer S, Bühlmann P (2008) The group Lasso for logistic regression. J Royal Stat Soc B Met 70:53–71CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Meinshausen N (2007) Relaxed Lasso. Comput Stat Data An 52:374–393MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Meinshausen N, Bühlmann P (2010) Stability selection (with discussion). J Royal Stat Soc B Met 72:417–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Melin R, Fugl-Meyer AR (2003) On prediction of vocational rehabilitation outcome at a Swedish employability institute. J Rehabil Med 35:284–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Miller AJ (2002) Subset selection in regression. Chapman and Hall, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mitnitski AB, Graham JE, Mogilner AJ, Rockwood K (2002) Frailty, fitness and late-life mortality in relation to chronological and biological age. BMC Geriatr 2:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mitnitski AB, Mogilner AJ, Graham JE, Rockwood K (2003) Techniques for knowledge discovery in existing biomedical databases: Estimation of individual aging effects in cognition in relation to dementia. J Clinical Epidemiol 56:116–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Morris JN, Fries BE, Mehr DR, Hawes C, Phillips C, Mor V et al (1994) MDS cognitive performance scale. J Gerontol 49:M174–M182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Morris JN, Fries BE, Morris SA (1999) Scaling ADLs within the MDS. J Gerontol Med Sci 54:M546–M553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Morris JN, Fries BE, Steel K, Ikegami N, Bernabei R, Carpenter GI et al (1997) Comprehensive clinical assessment in community setting: applicability of the MDS-HC. J Am Geriatr Soc 45:1017–1024Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Morris JN, Fries BE, Steel K, Ikegami N, Bernabei R (1999) Primer on use of the Minimum Data Set-Home Care (MDS-HC) version 2.0© and the Client Assessment Protocols (CAPs). Hebrew Rehabilitation Center for Aged, BostonGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Naglie G, Tansey C, Kirkland JL, Ogilvie-Harris DJ, Detsky AS, Etchells E, Tomlinson G, O’Rourke K, Goldlist B (2002) Interdisciplinary inpatient care for elderly people with hip fracture: a randomized controlled trial. Can Med Assoc J 167:25–32Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ottenbacher KJ, Linn RT, Smith PM, Illig SB, Mancuso M, Granger CV (2004) Comparison of logistic regression and neural network analysis applied to predicting living setting after hip fracture. Ann Epidemiol 14:551–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pearce CB, Gunn SR, Ahmed A, Johnson CD (2006) Machine learning can improve prediction of severity in acute pancreatitis using admission values of APACHE II score and C-reactive protein. Pancreatology 6:123–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pepe MS (2003) The statistical evaluation of medical tests for classification and prediction. Oxford University Press, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Price RK, Spitznagel EL, Downey TJ, Meyer DJ, Risk NK, El-Ghassawy OG (2000) Applying artificial neural network models to clinical decision making. Psychol Assess 12:40–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Radchenko P, James G (2008) Variable inclusion and shrinkage algorithms. J Amer Statist Assoc 103:1304–1315MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ramos-Pollán R, Guevara-López MA, Suárez-Ortega C, Díaz-Herrero G, Franco-Valiente JM, Rubio-Del-Solar M, González-de-Posada N, Vaz MA, Loureiro J, Ramos I (2012) Discovering mammography-based machine learning classifiers for breast cancer diagnosis. J Med Syst 36(4):2259–2269Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rockwood K, Mitnitski AB (2007) Frailty in relation to the accumulation of deficits. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 62:722–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Shmueli G (2010) To explain or to predict? Stat Sci 25:289–310MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Searle S, Mitnitski AB, Gahbauer E, Gill T, Rockwood K (2008) A standard procedure for creating a frailty index. BMC Geriatr 8:24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Stolee P, Borrie MJ, Cook S, Hollomby J, the participants of the Canadian Consensus Workshop on Geriatric Rehabilitation (2004) A research agenda for geriatric rehabilitation: the Canadian consensus. Geriatr Today J Can Geriatr Soc 7:38–42Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Tam SF, Cheing GLY, Hui-Chan SWY (2004) Predicting osteoarthritic knee rehabilitation outcome by using a prediction model using data mining techniques. Int J Rehabil Res 27:65–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Thorsen L, Gjerset GM, Loge JH, Kiserud CE, Skovlund E, Fløtten T, Fosså SD (2011) Cancer patients’ needs for rehabilitation services. Acta Oncol 50:212–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tibshirani R (1996) Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. J Royal Stat Soc B 58:267–288MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Vapnik VN (1995) The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Wells JL, Seabrook JA, Stolee P, Borrie MJ, Knoefel F (2003) State of the art in geriatric rehabilitation. Part I: review of frailty and comprehensive geriatric assessment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 84:890–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Wells JL, Seabrook JA, Stolee P, Borrie MJ, Knoefel F (2003) State of the art in geriatric rehabilitation. Part II: clinical challenges. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 84:898–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Williams AP, Lum JM, Deber R, Montgomery R, Kuluski K, Peckham A et al (2009) Aging at home: integrating community-based care for older persons. Healthc Pap 10:8–21Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Xin L, Zhu M (2012) Stochastic stepwise ensembles for variable selection. J Comput Graph Stat 21:275–294MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Zou H (2006) The adaptive Lasso and its oracle properties. J Am Stat Assoc 101:1418–1429CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Zou H, Hastie TJ (2005) Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net. J Royal Stat Soc B 67:301–320MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zhu M (2008) Kernels and ensembles: perspectives on statistical learning. Am Stat 62:97–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Zhu M, Chipman HA (2006) Darwinian evolution in parallel universes: a parallel genetic algorithm for variable selection. Technometrics 48:491–502MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Zhu M, Chen W, Hirdes JP, Stolee P (2007) The K-nearest neighbors algorithm predicted rehabilitation potential better than current clinical assessment protocol. J Clin Epidemiol 60:1015–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Zhu M, Zhang Z, Hirdes JP, Stolee P (2007) Using machine learning algorithms to guide rehabilitation planning for home care clients. BMC Med Inform Dec Mak 7:41CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mu Zhu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lu Cheng
    • 1
  • Joshua J. Armstrong
    • 2
  • Jeff W. Poss
    • 2
  • John P. Hirdes
    • 2
  • Paul Stolee
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Statistics and Actuarial ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.School of Public Health and Health SystemsUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations