PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Filip Emil Schjerven
AU  - Emma Ingeström
AU  - Frank Lindseth
AU  - Ingelin Steinsland
TI  - Can machine learning improve risk prediction of incident hypertension? An internal method comparison and external validation of the Framingham risk model using HUNT Study data
AID  - 10.1101/2022.11.02.22281859
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.11.02.22281859
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/04/2022.11.02.22281859.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/04/2022.11.02.22281859.full
AB  - A recent meta-review on hypertension risk models detailed that the differences in data and study-setup have a large influence on performance, meaning model comparisons should be performed using the same study data. We compared five different machine learning algorithms and the externally developed Framingham risk model in predicting risk of incident hypertension using data from the Trøndelag Health Study. The dataset yielded n = 23722 individuals with p = 17 features recorded at baseline before follow-up 11 years later. Individuals were without hypertension, diabetes, or history of CVD at baseline. Features included clinical measurements, serum markers, and questionnaire-based information on health and lifestyle. The included modelling algorithms varied in complexity from simpler linear predictors like logistic regression to the eXtreme Gradient Boosting algorithm. The other algorithms were Random Forest, Support Vector Machines, K-Nearest Neighbor. After selecting hyperparameters using cross-validation on a training set, we evaluated the models’ performance on discrimination, calibration, and clinical usefulness on a separate testing set using bootstrapping. Although the machine learning models displayed the best performance measures on average, the improvement from a logistic regression model fitted with elastic regularization was small. The externally developed Framingham risk model performed well on discrimination, but severely overestimated risk of incident hypertension on our data. After a simple recalibration, the Framingham risk model performed as well or even better than some of the newly developed models on all measures. Using the available data, this indicates that low-complexity models may suffice for long-term risk modelling. However, more studies are needed to assess potential benefits of a more diverse feature-set. This study marks the first attempt at applying machine learning methods and evaluating their performance on discrimination, calibration, and clinical usefulness within the same study on hypertension risk modelling.Author summary Hypertension, the state of persistent high blood pressure, is a largely symptom-free medical condition affecting millions of individuals worldwide, a number that is expected to rise in the coming years. While consequences of unchecked hypertension are severe, life-style modifications have been proven to be effective in prevention and treatment of hypertension. A possible tool for identifying individuals at risk of developing hypertension has been the creation of hypertension risk scores, which calculate a probability of incident hypertension sometime in the future. We compared applying machine learning as opposed to more traditional tools for constructing risk models on a large Norwegian cohort, measuring performance by model validity and clinical usefulness. Using easily obtainable clinical information and blood biomarkers as inputs, we found no clear advantage in performance using the machine learning models. Only a few of our included inputs, namely systolic and diastolic blood pressure, age, and BMI were found to be important for accurate prediction. This suggest more diverse information on individuals, like genetic, socio-economic, or dietary information, may be necessary for machine learning to excel over more established methods. A risk model developed using an American cohort, the Framingham risk model, performed well on our data after recalibration. Our study provides new insights into machine learning may be used to enhance hypertension risk prediction.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe author(s) received no specific funding for this work.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Regional Ethics Commitee (REK) is responsible for approving all medical research that is subjected to the law on health research. See: https://rekportalen.no/#hjem/homeI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT) has invited persons aged 13 - 100 years to four surveys between 1984 and 2019. Comprehensive data from more than 140,000 persons having participated at least once and biological material from 78,000 persons are collected. The data are stored in HUNT databank and biological material in HUNT biobank. HUNT Research Centre has permission from the Norwegian Data Inspectorate to store and handle these data. The key identification in the data base is the personal identification number given to all Norwegians at birth or immigration, whilst de-identified data are sent to researchers upon approval of a research protocol by the Regional Ethical Committee and HUNT Research Centre. To protect participants’ privacy, HUNT Research Centre aims to limit storage of data outside HUNT databank, and cannot deposit data in open repositories. HUNT databank has precise information on all data exported to different projects and are able to reproduce these on request. There are no restrictions regarding data export given approval of applications to HUNT Research Centre. For more information see: http://www.ntnu.edu/hunt/data