ABSTRACT
Objective Electronic health records (EHRs) can improve patient care by enabling systematic identification of patients for targeted decision support. But, this requires scalable learning of computable phenotypes. To this end, we developed the feature engineering automation tool (FEAT) and assessed it in targeting screening for the underdiagnosed, under-treated disease primary aldosteronism.
Materials and Methods We selected 1,199 subjects receiving longitudinal care in a large health system and classified them for hypertension (N=608), hypertension with unexplained hypokalemia (N=172), and apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (N=176) by chart review. We derived 331 features from EHR encounters, diagnoses, laboratories, medications, vitals, and notes. We modified FEAT to encourage model parsimony and compared its models’ performance and interpretability to those of expert-curated heuristics and conventional machine learning.
Results FEAT models trained to replicate expert-curated heuristics had higher area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) than all other models (p < 0.001) except random forests and were smaller than all other models (p < 1e-6) except decision trees. FEAT models trained to predict chart review phenotypes exhibited similar AUPRC to penalized logistic regression while being simpler than all other models (p < 1e-6). For treatment-resistant hypertension, FEAT learned a six-feature, clinically intuitive model that demonstrated a positive predictive value of 0.70 and sensitivity of 0.62 in held-out testing data.
Discussion FEAT learns computable phenotypes that approach the performance of expert-curated heuristics and conventional machine learning without sacrificing interpretability.
Conclusion By constructing accurate and interpretable computable phenotypes at scale, FEAT has the potential to facilitate systematic clinical decision support.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Grant 2019084 from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and the University of Pennsylvania. W. La Cava was supported by NIH grant K99 LM012926. J.H. Moore and W. La Cava were supported by NIH grant R01 LM010098. J. B. Cohen was supported by NIH grants K23 HL133843 and R01 HL153646.
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:
University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board (#827260)
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
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 and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Minor revisions to analyses and text. Corrections to affiliations and funding.
Data Availability
Public data used for benchmarking FEAT is available from www.github.com/EpistasisLab/pmlb. Clinical data underlying this article cannot be shared publicly to protect the privacy of the subjects. Upon request and subject to appropriate approvals, it will be shared by the corresponding author.
