Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 6, 2026

Computerized Dynamic Posturography for Postural Control Assessment in Patients with Intermittent Claudication
Published on: December 11, 2013
Comparative Performance of Clinician and Computational Approaches in Forecasting Adverse Outcomes in Intermittent
Bharadhwaj Ravindhran1, Arthur Lim1, Sean Pymer1
1Academic Vascular Surgical Unit, Hull York Medical School, Hull, UK.
Background:
Recent evidence has shown that machine learning (ML) techniques can accurately forecast adverse cardiovascular and limb events in patients with intermittent claudication. This is the first study to compare the predictive performance of ML versus traditional logistic regression (LR) and clinicians.
Methods:
An anonymized dataset of 99 patients with 27 baseline characteristics, compliance with best medical therapy/smoking cessation was used for comparison. Predictive performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, F1 score, and Brier score. ML, LR, and clinicians were compared in their ability to predict outcomes including progression to chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) at 2 and 5 years, and probability of major adverse cardiovascular events or limb events upto 5 years. Independent variable importance ranking was performed to identify the most influential predictors.
Results:
The Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator based ML model was compared with (LR) and predictions from 8 clinicians. ML significantly outperformed LR and clinicians across all outcomes. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for CLTI at 2 years: ML 0.885, LR 0.74, best clinician 0.63; CLTI at 5 years: ML 0.936, LR 0.808, best clinician 0.639; major adverse cardiovascular event at 5 years: ML 0.963, LR 0.759, best clinician 0.611; major adverse limb event: ML 0.957, LR 0.9, best clinician 0.677. Brier scores for the ML model demonstrated excellent accuracy: ML (0.03-0.07), compared to LR (0.10-0.22) and clinicians (>0.31).The ML model demonstrated superior predictive performance with F1 scores ranging from 0.80 to 0.86 across all outcomes, consistently outperforming both LR (F1 scores: 0.61-0.72) and individual clinicians (F1 scores: 0.50-0.59).
Conclusion:
ML-based prediction models significantly outperform traditional regression and clinician judgment, primarily due to their ability to capture complex nonlinear associations between variables.
More Related Videos
07:25Predicting Amputation using Local Circulating Mononuclear Progenitor Cells in Angioplasty-treated Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia
Published on: September 22, 2020
05:16Cutoff Value of Phase Angle by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis at Admission as a Prognostic Factor in Patients with Acute Heart Failure
Published on: June 10, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Peripheral Arterial Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Evaluation
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care