Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 21, 2026

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Machine Learning versus Penalized Logistic Regression for Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Ruptured Abdominal
María Lourdes Del Río-Solá1, Clara de la Torre-Casaseca2, Marina Jiménez-Caja2
1Department of Vascular Surgery, University Clinical Hospital of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain; Department of Surgery, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Background:
Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) remains associated with substantial in-hospital mortality. Although machine-learning methods can model complex nonlinear relationships between admission characteristics and outcome, their incremental value over conventional regression remains uncertain. We compared 3 prediction models using identical admission variables and a uniform validation framework.
Methods:
This retrospective single-center cohort included 196 unique patients with rAAA managed between 2006 and 2024. Five prespecified admission predictors were evaluated: age, hypovolaemic shock, maximal aneurysm diameter, hemoglobin, and systolic blood pressure. Missing data were imputed independently within each training partition. Penalized logistic regression, gradient boosting, and a multilayer perceptron (MLP) were compared using nested five-fold cross-validation repeated 5 times. Secondary temporal validation was performed in the 181 patients with a recoverable treatment year: models were developed in the 2006-2018 cohort (n = 110) and evaluated, without refitting or recalibration, in the 2019-2024 cohort (n = 71).
Results:
In-hospital mortality occurred in 99/196 patients (50.5%). Gradient boosting and penalized logistic regression achieved comparable moderate discrimination, with area under the curves (AUCs) of 0.739 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.666 to 0.805) and 0.729 (95% CI, 0.654 to 0.796), respectively. Their paired AUC difference was 0.010 (95% CI, -0.024 to 0.045). The MLP showed lower discrimination (AUC, 0.643; 95% CI, 0.563-0.719), with a paired difference versus penalized logistic regression of -0.086 (95% CI, -0.160 to -0.013). In temporal validation, AUCs were 0.800 (95% CI, 0.686 to 0.904) for gradient boosting, 0.739 (95% CI, 0.607 to 0.858) for penalized logistic regression, and 0.632 (95% CI, 0.496 to 0.762) for the MLP. Temporal calibration demonstrated overprediction of absolute mortality risk, with observed mortality of 40.8% compared with mean predicted mortality of 49.9%, 50.0%, and 63.4%, respectively.
Conclusion:
Using a uniform internal and temporal validation framework, gradient boosting achieved the highest numerical performance but did not demonstrate a conclusive advantage over penalized logistic regression. The MLP provided no incremental predictive benefit. These findings indicate that increasing algorithmic complexity does not necessarily improve mortality prediction in modest-sized emergency vascular datasets and support interpretable regression as an essential benchmark. External multicenter validation and more complete prospective data collection are required before clinical implementation.
Related Concept Videos
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups