Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2001; 40(05): 373-379
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1634195
Original Article
Schattauer GmbH

Discussing Anomalous Situations using Decision Trees: A Head Injury Case Study

A. McQuatt
1   Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland
,
D. Sleeman
1   Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland
,
P. J. D. Andrews
2   Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland
,
V. Corruble
1   Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland
,
P. A. Jones
2   Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
08 February 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: Predicting the outcome of seriously ill patients is a challenging problem for clinicians.

Methods: One alternative to clinical trials is to analyse existing patient data in an attempt to predict the several outcomes, and to suggest therapies. In this paper we use decision tree techniques to predict the outcome of head injury patients. The work is based on patient data from the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary which contains both background (demographic) data and temporal (physiological) data.

Results: The focus of this paper is the discussion of the anomalous cases in the decision trees with the domain experts (the clinicians).

Conclusions: These analyses led to the detection of several situations where both the data analysis and patient data collection should be enhanced, which in turn should lead to improved patient care.

Keywords

Anomalies - Decision Tree Analysis - Demographic Data - Traumatic Brain Injuries - Temporal/Physiological Data
 

  • References

  • 1 Jennett B, Bond M. Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. A practical scale. Lancet 1975; 1: 480-4.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Jones PA, Andrews PJD, Midgley S, Anderson SI, Piper IR, Tocher JL, Housley AM, Corrie JA, Slattery J, Dearden NM, Miller JD. Measuring the burden of secondary Insults in Head-Injured Patients during Intensive Care. J Neurosurg Anaesthesiol 1994; 6 (Suppl. 01) 4-14.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Choi SC, Muizelaar JP, Barnes TY, Mamarou A, Brooks DM, Young HF. Young. Prediction tree for severely head-injured patients. J Neurosurg 1991; 75: 251-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pilih IA, Mladenic D, Lavrac N, Prevec TS. Data analysis of patients with severed head injury. In: Intelligent Data Analysis in Medicine and Pharmacology. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1997
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA. et al. Classification and regression trees. Belmont, California: Wadsworth; 1984
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale. Lancet 1974; 2: 81-4.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gerstenbrand F, Saltuari L, Kofler M, Formisano R. Clinical evaluation of severe head injury. Neurologia 1990; 39 (Suppl. 01) 71-88.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Mladenic D. The learning system Magnus Assistant. BSc Thesis. Faculty of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Ljubljana; Slovenia: 1990
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Quinlan JR. Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning 1986; 1: 81-106.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Quinlan JR. Probabilistic Decision Trees. In: Machine Learning: An A. I. Approach. III, Morgan Kaufmann 1990: 140-52.
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Quinlan JR. Data Mining Tools C5.0 and See5. Rulequest Research, 1997. Web Ref: http://www.rulequest.com/see5-info.html.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Quinlan JR. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann 1993
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 McQuatt A. Using Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Clinical Outcome. MSc Thesis. Computing Science Department, The University of Aberdeen; 1999
    Google Scholar