skip to main content
10.1145/3107411.3107433acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbcbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Learning Deep Representations from Heterogeneous Patient Data for Predictive Diagnosis

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 August 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Predictive diagnosis benefits both patients and hospitals. Major challenges limiting the effectiveness of machine learning based predictive diagnosis include the lack of efficient feature selection methods and the heterogeneity of measured patient data (e.g., vital signs). In this paper, we propose DLFS, an efficient feature selection scheme based on deep learning that is applicable for heterogeneous data. DLFS is unsupervised in nature and can learn compact representations from patient data automatically for efficient prediction. In this paper, the specific problem of predicting the patients' length of stay in the hospital is investigated in a predictive diagnosis framework which uses DLFS for feature selection. Real patient data from the pneumonia database of the National University Health System (NUHS) in Singapore are collected to verify the effectiveness of DLFS. By running experiments on real-world patient data and comparing with several other commonly used feature selection methods, we demonstrate the advantage of the proposed DLFS scheme.

References

  1. Anthony J. Bell and Terrence J. Sejnowski 1995. An Information-maximization Approach to Blind Separation and Blind Deconvolution. Neural Comput., Vol. 7, 6 (Nov. 1995), 1129--1159. binfopersonS. A. Mayer, J. Rivolta, J. Stillman, B. Boden-Albala, M. S. Elkind, R. Marshall, and J. Y. Chong. 2010. Impact of delayed transfer of critically ill stroke patients from the Emergency Department to the Neuro-ICU. Neurocrit Care, Vol. 13, 1 (Aug 2010), 75--81. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. F. C. Ryckman, P. A. Yelton, A. M. Anneken, P. E. Kiessling, P. J. Schoettker, and U. R. Kotagal. 2009. Redesigning intensive care unit flow using variability management to improve access and safety. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Vol. 35, 11 (Nov 2009), 535--543.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Angela Simpson, Vincent Y. Tan, John Winn, Markus Svensen, Christopher Bishop, David Heckerman, Iain Buchan, and Adnan Custovic. 2010. Beyond Atopy: Multiple Patterns of Sensitization in Relation to Asthma in a Birth Cohort Study. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Vol. 181 (February 2010), 1200--1206.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Ralph Snyderman. 2012. Personalized health care: From theory to practice. Biotechnology Journal, Vol. 7, 8 (2012), 973--979. 1860--7314Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Pascal Vincent, Hugo Larochelle, Isabelle Lajoie, Yoshua Bengio, and Pierre-Antoine Manzagol. 2010. Stacked Denoising Autoencoders: Learning Useful Representations in a Deep Network with a Local Denoising Criterion. J. Mach. Learn. Res. Vol. 11 (Dec. 2010), 3371--3408. 1532--4435 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. F. Wang, N. Lee, J. Hu, J. Sun, S. Ebadollahi, and A. F. Laine. 2013. A Framework for Mining Signatures from Event Sequences and Its Applications in Healthcare Data. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 35, 2 (Feb 2013), 272--285. 0162--8828 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. N. G. Weiskopf and C. Weng 2013. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. J Am Med Inform Assoc Vol. 20, 1 (Jan 2013), 144--151.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Jionglin Wu, Jason Roy, and Walter F. Stewart 2010. Prediction Modeling Using EHR Data: Challenges, Strategies, and a Comparison of Machine Learning Approaches. Vol. 48, 6 (2010), S106--S113. 00257079Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. F. Zhao and R. Yang. 2007. Power-Quality Disturbance Recognition Using S-Transform. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery Vol. 22, 2 (April 2007), 944--950. 0885--8977Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. O. C. Zienkiewicz. 1976. Splines and variational methods. Internat. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. Vol. 10, 2 (1976), 487--487. 1097-0207Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Learning Deep Representations from Heterogeneous Patient Data for Predictive Diagnosis

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ACM-BCB '17: Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology,and Health Informatics
      August 2017
      800 pages
      ISBN:9781450347228
      DOI:10.1145/3107411

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 August 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      ACM-BCB '17 Paper Acceptance Rate42of132submissions,32%Overall Acceptance Rate254of885submissions,29%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader