Abstract
Background Referral of patients with heart failure (HF) who are at high mortality risk for specialist evaluation is recommended. Yet, most tools for identifying such patients are difficult to implement in electronic health record (EHR) systems.
Objective To assess the performance and ease of implementation of Machine learning Assessment of RisK and EaRly mortality in Heart Failure (MARKER-HF), a machine-learning model that uses structured data that is readily available in the EHR, and compare it with two commonly-used risk scores: the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) and Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic (MAGGIC) Heart Failure Risk Score.
Design Retrospective, cohort study
Participants Data from 6,764 adults with HF were abstracted from EHRs at a large integrated health system from 1/1/10-12/31/19.
Main Measures One-year survival from time of first cardiology or primary care visit was estimated using MARKER-HF, SHFM and MAGGIC. Discrimination was measured by the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed graphically.
Key Results Compared to MARKER-HF, both SHFM and MAGGIC required a considerably larger amount of data engineering and imputation to generate risk score estimates. MARKER-HF, SHFM, and MAGGIC exhibited similar discriminations with AUCs of 0.70 (0.69-0.73), 0.71 (0.69-0.72), and 0.71 (95% CI 0.70-0.73) respectively. All three scores showed good calibration across the full risk spectrum.
Conclusions These findings suggest that MARKER-HF, which uses readily available clinical and lab measurements in the EHR and required less imputation and data engineering than SHFM and MAGGIC, is an easier tool to identify high-risk patients in ambulatory clinics who could benefit from referral to a HF specialist.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr. Ahmad has received consulting fees from Teladoc Livongo and Pfizer outside the submitted work. Dr. Petito received research support from Omron Healthcare Co. Ltd. outside the submitted work. The remaining authors declare no financial or non-financial competing interests.
Funding Statement
Dr. Ahmad was supported by grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K12HS026385), National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K23HL155970), and the American Heart Association (AHA number 856917). Research reported in this publication was supported, in part, by the National Institutes of Health's National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR001422).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Northwestern University Institutional Review Board gave ethical approval this study.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos