Search

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Traumatic spinal cord injury can have a dramatic effect on a patient's life. The degree of neurologic recovery greatly influences a patient's treatment and expected quality of life. This has resulted in the development of machine learning algorithms (MLA) that use acute demographic and neurologic information to prognosticate recovery. The van Middendorp et al. (2011) (vM) logistic regression (LR) model has been established as a reference model for the prediction of walking recovery following spinal cord injury as it has been validated within many different countries. However, an examination of the way in which these prediction models are evaluated is warranted. The area under the receiver operators curve (AUROC) has been consistently used when evaluating model performance, but it has been shown that AUROC overemphasizes the most common event resulting in an inaccurate assessment when the data are imbalanced. Furthermore, there is evidence that the use of more advanced MLA, such as an unsupervised k-means model, may show superior performance compared to LR as they can handle a larger number of features. PURPOSE The first objective of the study was to assess the performance of both an unsupervised MLA and LR model with complete admission neurologic information against the vM and Hicks models. Second, a comparison between the accuracy of the AUROC and the F1-score will be made to determine which method is superior for the assessment of diagnostic performance of prediction models on large-scale datasets. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective review of a prospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE The Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry (RHSCIR) was used in this study. All patients enrolled between 2004 and 2017 with complete neurologic examination and Functional Independence Measure outcome data at ≥1 year follow-up or who could walk at discharge were included. The prognostic variables included age (dichotomized at ≥65 years old); American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade; and individual motor, light touch, and pinprick score from L2 to S1. OUTCOME MEASURES The Functional Independence Measure locomotor score was used to assess independent walking ability at discharge or 1-year follow-up. METHODS An unsupervised MLA with k=2 was chosen in order to identify a “walk” cluster and a “not walk” cluster. Model performance was assessed through the development of a receiver operating characteristic curve with associated AUROC and a precision-recall curve with associated F1-score. The study and the RHSCIR are supported by funding from Health Canada, Western Economic Diversification Canada, and the Governments of Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Ontario. These funders had no role in the study or study reporting and the authors have no conflicts of interest to report. RESULTS No clinically relevant differences were found between with the use of an unsupervised MLA with a greater amount of initial neurologic information compared to the established standards for any AIS classification. Although demonstrated for all separate AIS classifications, most notably, the AUROC for the vM (0.78) and Hicks models (0.76) were found to be superior to that of the new LR model (0.72); however, the vM and Hicks models had more than double the amount of false negative classifications compared to the LR. The F1-scores between these three models were also found to be different but with the vM and Hicks models being lower than the LR (0.85, 0.81, and 0.89, respectively). CONCLUSIONS No clinically relevant differences were found between the use of an unsupervised MLA with complete admission neurologic information compared to the previously validated standards; however, when comparing the performance of the AUROC and F1-score, the AUROC showed inaccurate prognostic performance when there was an imbalance toward a greater amount of false negatives. Importantly, the F1-score did not succumb to this imbalance. As AUROC has been used as the standard when evaluating performance of prediction models, consideration as to whether this is the most appropriate method is warranted. Future work should focus on comparing AUROC and F1-scores with other previously validated models.

BACKGROUND With spinal surgery rates increasing in North America, models that are able to accurately predict which patients are at greater risk of developing complications are highly warranted. However, the previously published methods which have used large, multi-centre databases to develop their prediction models have relied on the receiver operator characteristics curve with the associated area under the curve (AUC) to assess their model's performance. Recently, it has been found that a precision-recall curve with the associated F1-score could provide a more realistic analysis for these models. PURPOSE To develop a logistic regression (LR) model for the prediction of complications following posterior lumbar spine surgery and to then assess for any difference in performance of the model when using the AUC versus the F1-score. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective review of a prospective cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) registry was used. All patients that underwent posterior lumbar spine surgery between 2005 to 2016 with appropriate data were included. OUTCOME MEASURES Both the AUC and F1-score were utilized to assess the prognostic performance of the prediction model. METHODS In order to develop the LR model used to predict a complication during or following spine surgery, 19 variables were selected by three orthopedic spine surgeons from the NSQIP registry. Two datasets were developed for this analysis: (1) an imbalanced dataset, which was taken directly from the NSQIP registry, and (2) a down-sampled set. The purpose of the down-sampled set was to balance the data in order to evaluate whether balancing the data had an effect on model performance. The AUC and F1-score were applied to both of these datasets. RESULTS Within the NSQIP database, 52,787 spine surgery cases were identified of which only 10% of these cases had complications during surgery. Applying the LR model showed a large difference between the AUC (0.69) and the F1 score (0.075) on the imbalanced dataset. However, no major differences existed between the AUC and F1-score when the data was balanced and the LR model was reapplied (0.69 and 0.62, AUC and F1-score, respectively). CONCLUSIONS The F1-score detected a drastically lower performance for the prediction of complications when using the imbalanced data, but detected a performance similar to the AUC level when balancing techniques were utilized for the dataset. This difference is due to a low precision score when many false positive classifications are present, which is not identified when using the AUC value. This lowers the utility of the AUC score, as many of the datasets used in medicine are imbalanced. Therefore, we recommend using the F1-score on large, prospective databases when the data is imbalanced with a large amount of true negative classifications.

The purpose of this project was to determine if it is feasible to implement a rapid recovery pathway (RRP) for the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) within a single-payer universal healthcare system while simultaneously decreasing length of stay (LOS) without increasing post-operative complications. A retrospective analysis was completed for all patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion for AIS at a tertiary children’s hospital in Canada between March 2010 and February 2019, with date of implementation of the RRP being March 1st, 2015. Patient demographic information was collected along with a variety of outcome variables including: LOS, wound complication, infection, 30-day return to the OR, 30-day emergency department visit, and 30-day hospital readmission. An interrupted time series analysis was utilized to determine if any benefits were associated with the implementation of the RRP. A total of 244 patients were identified, with 113 patients in the conventional pathway and 131 in the RRP. No significant differences in demographic features or post-operative complications were found between the two cohorts (p > 0.05). Using a robust linear time series model, LOS was found to be significantly shorter in the RRP group, with the average LOS being 5.2 [95% IQR 4.3–6.1] days in the conventional group and 3.4 [95% IQR 3.3–3.5] days in the RRP group (p

Background:In addition to the relative size of the acetabular rim and how the pelvis is positioned in space, the plane in which the acetabular version is calculated also affects its measurement.Purpose:To determine the relative contribution of pelvic and acetabular characteristics on morphological version (measured relative to the anterior pelvic plane angle [APPA]) and functional version (measured relative to the horizontal table).Study Design:Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:Included were 50 acetabular dysplasia patients and 109 asymptomatic controls. Using image analysis software, morphological parameters of the pelvis and acetabulum were determined from 2-dimensional computed topography: pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt angle, sacral slope, APPA, morphological and functional acetabular versions, and subtended angles (measure of acetabular rim prominence relative to the femoral head center) around the acetabular clockface in 30° increments. Correlation and multivariable regression analyses were performed with morphological and functional version as dependent variables and spinopelvic and acetabular parameters as independent variables.Results:Morphological version was moderately associated with differences between anterior and posterior subtended angles ( R = 0.68 [ P < .001] and R = 0.57 [ P < .001] for differences at 165° and 15° and 135° and 45°, respectively). Functional version was moderately associated with pelvic tilt angle ( R = 0.56; P 2= 0.44; P < .01) and functional version ( R2= 0.58; P < .01). Subtended angle difference between 165° and 15° ( B = 0.36 [95% CI, 0.24-0.49]; P < .001) was most strongly related to morphological version, and pelvic tilt angle ( B = 0.57 [95% CI, 0.46-0.68]; P < .001) was most strongly related to functional version.Conclusion:Functional acetabular version was influenced most strongly by pelvic tilt angle rather than the relative prominence of the acetabular rims. Before determining surgical management for version abnormalities, it would be prudent to assess pelvic mobility and characteristics in different functional positions. In patients with minimal pelvic tilt change dynamically, corrective osteotomy would be the treatment of choice to improve functional version.