Using Automated Feature Selection for Building Case-Based Reasoning Systems: An Example from Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements | SpringerLink
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Using Automated Feature Selection for Building Case-Based Reasoning Systems: An Example from Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Artificial Intelligence XXXVIII (SGAI-AI 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 13101))

  • 860 Accesses

Abstract

Feature selection for case representation is an essential phase of Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) system development. To (semi-)automate the feature selection process can ease the knowledge engineering process. This paper explores the feature importance provided for XGBoost models as basis for creating CBR systems. We use Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements (PROMs) on low back pain from the selfBACK project in our experiments. PROMs are a valuable source of information that capture physical, emotional as well as social aspects of well-being from the perspective of the patients. Leveraging the analytical capabilities of machine learning methods and data science techniques for exploiting PROMs have the potential of improving decision making. This paper presents a two-fold approach employed on our dataset for feature selection that combines statistical strength with data-driven knowledge modelling in CBR and compares it with permutation feature selection using XGBoost regressor. Furthermore, we compare the performance of the CBR models, built with the selected features, with two machine learning algorithms for predicting different PROMs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
JPY 3498
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
JPY 8579
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
JPY 10724
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.hss.edu/proms.asp.

  2. 2.

    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03798288.

  3. 3.

    http://www.selfback.eu.

  4. 4.

    https://scikit-learn.org/stable/auto_examples/ensemble/plot_forest_importances.html.

  5. 5.

    https://github.com/ntnu-ai-lab/mycbr-sdk.

References

  1. Aamodt, A., Plaza, E.: Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. Artif. Intell. Commun. 7(1), 39–59 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Andritsos, P., Jurisica, I., Glasgow, J.I.: Case-based reasoning for biomedical informatics and medicine. In: Springer Handbook of Bio-/Neuroinformatics, pp. 207–221. Springer (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bach, K., Althoff, K.-D.: Developing case-based reasoning applications using myCBR 3. In: Agudo, B.D., Watson, I. (eds.) ICCBR 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7466, pp. 17–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32986-9_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Bach, K., Mathisen, B.M., Jaiswal, A.: Demonstrating the mycbr rest api. In: ICCBR Workshops, pp. 144–155 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bichindaritz, I., Marling, C.: Case-Based Reasoning in the Health Sciences: Foundations and Research Directions. In: Bichindaritz,, I., Vaidya, S., Jain, A., Jain, L.C. (eds.) Computational Intelligence in Healthcare 4. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 309. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Buitinck, L., et al.: API design for machine learning software: experiences from the scikit-learn project. In: ECML PKDD Workshop: Languages for Data Mining and Machine Learning, pp. 108–122 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chandrashekar, G., Sahin, F.: A survey on feature selection methods. Comput. Electr. Eng. 40(1), 16–28 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen, T., Guestrin, C.: Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD 2016, pp. 785–794. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fisher, A., Rudin, C., Dominici, F.: All models are wrong, but many are useful: Learning a variable’s importance by studying an entire class of prediction models simultaneously. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 20(177), 1–81 (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Floyd, M.W., Davoust, A., Esfandiari, B.: Considerations for real-time spatially-aware case-based reasoning: a case study in robotic soccer imitation. In: European Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, pp. 195–209. Springer (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fontana, M.A., Lyman, S., Sarker, G.K., Padgett, D.E., MacLean, C.H.: Can machine learning algorithms predict which patients will achieve minimally clinically important differences from total joint arthroplasty? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 477(6), 1267–1279 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Harris, A.H., Kuo, A.C., Weng, Y., Trickey, A.W., Bowe, T., Giori, N.J.: Can machine learning methods produce accurate and easy-to-use prediction models of 30-day complications and mortality after knee or hip arthroplasty? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 477(2), 452 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Holt, A., Bichindaritz, I., Schmidt, R., Perner, P.: Medical applications in case-based reasoning. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 20(3), 289–292 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huber, M., Kurz, C., Leidl, R.: Predicting patient-reported outcomes following hip and knee replacement surgery using supervised machine learning. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 19(1), 3 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hutter, F., Kotthoff, L., Vanschoren, J.: Automated Machine Learning. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05318-5

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Li, Y., Shiu, S.C.K., Pal, S.K., Liu, J.N.K.: A rough set-based case-based reasoner for text categorization. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 41(2), 229–255 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Li, Y.F., Xie, M., Goh, T.: A study of mutual information based feature selection for case based reasoning in software cost estimation. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(3), 5921–5931 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lin, I., et al.: What does best practice care for musculoskeletal pain look like? eleven consistent recommendations from high-quality clinical practice guidelines: systematic review. Br. J. Sports Med. 54(2), 79–86 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rahman, Q.A., Janmohamed, T., Clarke, H., Ritvo, P., Heffernan, J., Katz, J.: Interpretability and class imbalance in prediction models for pain volatility in manage my pain app users: analysis using feature selection and majority voting methods. JMIR Med. Inf. 7(4), e15601 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rahman, Q.A., Janmohamed, T., Pirbaglou, M., Clarke, H., Ritvo, P., Heffernan, J.M., Katz, J.: Defining and predicting pain volatility in users of the manage my pain app: analysis using data mining and machine learning methods. Journal of medical Internet research 20(11), e12001 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Salamó, M., Golobardes, E.: Rough sets reduction techniques for case-based reasoning. In: Aha, D.W., Watson, I. (eds.) ICCBR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2080, pp. 467–482. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44593-5_33

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Salamo, M., Lopez-Sanchez, M.: Rough set based approaches to feature selection for case-based reasoning classifiers. Pattern Recogn. Lett. 32(2), 280–292 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sandal, L.F., et al.: An app-delivered self-management program for people with low back pain: protocol for the selfback randomized controlled trial. JMIR Res. Protoc 8(12), e14720 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vallat, R.: Pingouin: statistics in python. J. Open Source Softw. 3(31), 1026 (2018). https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01026

  25. Verma, D., Bach, K., Mork, P.J.: Modelling similarity for comparing physical activity profiles - a data-driven approach. In: Cox, M.T., Funk, P., Begum, S. (eds.) CBR Research and Development. Springer, Cham (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Verma, D., Bach, K., Mork, P.J.: Similarity measure development for case-based reasoning–a data-driven approach. In: Bach, K., Ruocco, M. (eds.) NAIS 2019. CCIS, vol. 1056, pp. 143–148. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35664-4_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Wu, A., Kharrazi, H., Boulware, L., Snyder, C.: Measure once, cut twice -adding patient-reported outcome measures to the electronic health record for comparative effectiveness research. J Clin. Epidemiol. 66, S12–20 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Xiong, N., Funk, P.: Construction of fuzzy knowledge bases incorporating feature selection. Soft. Comput. 10(9), 796–804 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Xiong, N., Funk, P.: Combined feature selection and similarity modelling in case-based reasoning using hierarchical memetic algorithm. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Zhu, G.N., Hu, J., Qi, J., Ma, J., Peng, Y.H.: An integrated feature selection and cluster analysis techniques for case-based reasoning. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 39, 14–22 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The work has been conducted as part of the selfBACK and Back-UP projects, which have received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 689043 and No 777090.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

    Deepika Verma & Kerstin Bach

  2. Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

    Paul Jarle Mork

Authors
  1. Deepika Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kerstin Bach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Jarle Mork
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deepika Verma .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK

    Max Bramer

  2. RKE Consulting, Micheldever, UK

    Richard Ellis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Verma, D., Bach, K., Mork, P.J. (2021). Using Automated Feature Selection for Building Case-Based Reasoning Systems: An Example from Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements. In: Bramer, M., Ellis, R. (eds) Artificial Intelligence XXXVIII. SGAI-AI 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13101. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91100-3_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91100-3_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-91099-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-91100-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics