Feature Engineering for Interpretable Machine Learning for Quality Assurance in Radiation Oncology
Malvika Pillai1, Karthik Adapa1,2, John W Shumway2
1Carolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
|June 8, 2022
Summary
This study enhances pretreatment physics chart checks by using machine learning and feature selection to predict difficulty, reducing physicist workload. Random forest with mutual information achieved 84.0% accuracy, improving model transparency.
Area of Science:
- Medical Physics
- Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Radiology Quality Assurance
Background:
- Chart checking is a time-consuming task for physicists, leading to high cognitive workload.
- Existing automation efforts partially address chart checking but lack data-driven approaches for quality assurance.
- Reducing cognitive load in pretreatment physics chart checks is crucial for efficient and accurate patient care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate feature selection methods for enhancing machine learning model interpretability and transparency.
- To predict the difficulty of pretreatment physics chart checks using data-driven techniques.
- To reduce the cognitive workload associated with quality assurance processes in medical physics.
Main Methods:
- Comparison of four feature selection methods: chi-square, mutual information, feature importance thresholding, and greedy feature selection.
- Utilized four different machine learning classifiers.
- Employed SMOTE oversampling in conjunction with feature selection techniques.
Main Results:
- Random forest classifier demonstrated the highest performance when combined with SMOTE oversampling and mutual information for feature selection.
- Achieved an accuracy of 84.0%, Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 87.0%, precision of 80.0%, and recall of 80.0%.
- Feature selection methods significantly improved the interpretability and transparency of the predictive models.
Conclusions:
- Data-driven feature selection methods can effectively improve the interpretability and transparency of machine learning models in medical physics.
- The proposed approach offers a pathway to reduce cognitive workload in chart checking processes.
- This study highlights the potential of machine learning to optimize quality assurance in radiation oncology physics.
Related Concept Videos
Quality Assurance
210
Quality assurance is the overarching term used to describe the activities employed to ensure the proper performance of a system. These activities can be classified into three categories: quality control, quality assessment, and internal corrective measures. Typically, these activities work cyclically: quality control is performed before and during the analysis, while quality assessment occurs during and after the investigation. Internal corrective measures are implemented based on the findings...
210
Improving Translational Accuracy
11.9K
Base complementarity between the three base pairs of mRNA codon and the tRNA anticodon is not a failsafe mechanism. Inaccuracies can range from a single mismatch to no correct base pairing at all. The free energy difference between the correct and nearly correct base pairs can be as small as 3 kcal/ mol. With complementarity being the only proofreading step, the estimated error frequency would be one wrong amino acid in every 100 amino acids incorporated. However, error frequencies observed in...
11.9K
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
185
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
185


