Patient-reported outcomes as predictors of disability evolution in Multiple Sclerosis: An interpretable machine learning approach
Résumé fourni par la source
Background: Disability accrual in multiple sclerosis (MS) is highly variable and challenging to predict, complicating personalised care. Integrating machine learning (ML) with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinician-assessed outcomes (CAOs) may support tailored interventions. Objectives: To develop and validate an interpretable ML model for predicting disability accrual trajectories in MS. Methods: A multicentre data set of 1,176 MS patients with up to 8 years of follow-up was used. A random forest model was trained to predict disability accrual at 2, 3, 4, and 5 years, using baseline clinical variables, PROs and initial risk class as predictors. Model performance was assessed using accuracy, area under the curve, and survival analysis. Results: 437 patients composed final cohort. The model predicted disability changes with an accuracy of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.77–0.86) at 2 years and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.66–0.80) at 5 years. Initial risk class and baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) were the most influential predictors. Survival analysis confirmed model’s ability to effectively capture the time-dependent patterns of disability accrual events at the population level (log rank p > .05). Conclusions: The model offers robust and interpretable predictions that may support clinical decision-making using routine clinical data.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Patient-reported outcomes as predictors of disability evolution in Multiple Sclerosis: An interpretable machine learning approach
- Date Crossref
- 30/01/2026
- Éditeur
- SAGE Publications
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.