User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Algorithm can predict who will DIE or have a heart attack with 90% accuracy

  1. #1
    Points: 264,399, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 82.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307876
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,547
    Points
    264,399
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,662
    Thanked 39,250x in 27,871 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Algorithm can predict who will DIE or have a heart attack with 90% accuracy

    Algorithm similar to the ones used by Netflix and Spotify to recommend content can predict who will DIE or have a heart attack with 90% accuracy

    Algorithms similar to those employed by Netflix and Spotify to customise services are now better than human doctors at spotting who will die or have a heart attack. Machine learning was used to train LogitBoost, which its developers say can predict death or heart attacks with 90 per cent accuracy.It was programmed to use 85 variables to calculate the risk to the health of the 950 patients that it was fed scans and data from.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-accuracy.html

    But it was my daughters who told me I must watch Game of Thrones before I die.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  2. #2
    Points: 7,442, Level: 20
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 308
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Trumpster's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    355
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    780
    Points
    7,442
    Level
    20
    Thanks Given
    870
    Thanked 345x in 251 Posts
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's difficult to concentrate on the article when you try to scroll down and the text keeps jumping around.

    But I'll give my opinion anyway: Almost anything can be better than human doctors.

    Here's a thought: When a patient gets evaluated by a machine that claims to have 90% accuracy and is told there's a 90% chance they will have a heart attack and die, guess what, that diagnosis may likely have a nocebo effect and kill the patient. So even if the diagnosis was inaccurate, they will say, "See, we called it, thanks to our machine." If the patient gets quick treatment, whatever that may be, and survives, they will say, "See, we caught it in time and saved you, thanks to our machine."
    Last edited by Trumpster; 05-13-2019 at 03:06 PM.

  3. #3
    Points: 264,399, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 82.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307876
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,547
    Points
    264,399
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,662
    Thanked 39,250x in 27,871 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Trumpster View Post
    It's difficult to concentrate on the article when you try to scroll down and the text keeps jumping around.

    But I'll give my opinion anyway: Almost anything can be better than human doctors.

    Here's a thought: When a patient gets evaluated by a machine that claims to have 90% accuracy and is told there's a 90% chance they will have a heart attack and die, guess what, that diagnosis may likely have a nocebo effect and kill the patient. So even if the diagnosis was inaccurate, they will say, "See, we called it, thanks to our machine." If the patient gets quick treatment, whatever that may be, and survives, they will say, "See, we caught it in time and saved you, thanks to our machine."
    A better takeaway is that a machine that can simultaneously evaluate 80 symptoms is better than a doctor who can only evaluate three at a time.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to MisterVeritis For This Useful Post:

    Trumpster (05-14-2019)

  5. #4
    Points: 7,442, Level: 20
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 308
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Trumpster's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    355
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    780
    Points
    7,442
    Level
    20
    Thanks Given
    870
    Thanked 345x in 251 Posts
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The opening statement says it's programed to use 85 variables. It seems that would include scans, tests and questions. I found another link where it says,
    ....during the six year follow up, [it] had a 90% success rate at predicting 24 heart attacks and 49 deaths from any cause.
    https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/0...h-90-accuracy/

    The above link worked better but didn't have the whole story. But let's use what we have here: Suppose a doctor has access to this technology and uses it on a patient. And the result is a prediction that the patient may have a heart attack within the next 6 years. What will a doctor do with that? The doctor still has to be capable of coming up with an appropriate treatment regimen. I would guess the doctor might prescribe a cholesterol lowering drug. But a decision like that will not get to the root of the problem which has to do with the cause being the patient's poor lifestyle.

    I would hope that some of the 85 variables, or questions, have to do with the patient's lifestyle so that there would be no need for drugs. For example, the treatment might call for a better diet regimen, moderate exercise and stress control. However, if this technology becomes available to cardiologists, they are not likely to play along with getting to the root cause. The majority of cardiologists are only interested in performing revenue boosting interventions.
    Last edited by Trumpster; 05-14-2019 at 02:56 PM.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Trumpster For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (05-14-2019)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts