Confidence Predictions for the Diagnosis of Acute Abdominal Pain

  • Harris Papadopoulos
  • Alex Gammerman
  • Volodya Vovk
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 296)


Most current machine learning systems for medical decision support do not produce any indication of how reliable each of their predictions is. However, an indication of this kind is highly desirable especially in the medical field. This paper deals with this problem by applying a recently developed technique for assigning confidence measures to predictions, called conformal prediction, to the problem of acute abdominal pain diagnosis. The data used consist of a large number of hospital records of patients who suffered acute abdominal pain. Each record is described by 33 symptoms and is assigned to one of nine diagnostic groups. The proposed method is based on Neural Networks and for each patient it can produce either the most likely diagnosis together with an associated confidence measure, or the set of all possible diagnoses needed to satisfy a given level of confidence.


Acute Abdominal Pain Perforated Peptic Ulcer Computational Learn Theory Conformal Predictor Conformal Prediction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Anagnostou, T., Remzi, M., Djavan, B.: Artificial neural networks for decision-making in urologic oncology. Review in Urology 5(1), 15–21 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anastassopoulos, G.C., Iliadis, L.S.: Ann for prognosis of abdominal pain in childhood: Use of fuzzy modelling for convergence estimation. In: Proceedings 1st International Workshop on Combinations of Intelligent Methods and Applications, pp. 1–5 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blazadonakis, M., Moustakis, V., Charissis, G.: Deep assessment of machine learning techniques using patient treatment in acute abdominal pain in children. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 8(6), 527–542 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christoyianni, I., Koutras, A., Dermatas, E., Kokkinakis, G.: Computer aided diagnosis of breast cancer in digitized mammograms. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 26(5), 309–319 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gammerman, A., Thatcher, A.: Bayesian diagnostic probabilities without assuming independence of symptoms. Methods of Information in Medicine 30(1), 15–22 (1991)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Holst, H., Ohlsson, M., Peterson, C., Edenbrandt, L.: Intelligent computer reporting ‘lack of experience’: a confidence measure for decision support systems. Clinical Physiology 18(2), 139–147 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kononenko, I.: Machine learning for medical diagnosis: History, state of the art and perspective. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 23(1), 89–109 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lisboa, P.: A review of evidence of health benefit from artificial neural networks in medical intervention. Neural Networks 15(1), 11–39 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mantzaris, D., Anastassopoulos, G., Adamopoulos, A., Gardikis, S.: A non-symbolic implementation of abdominal pain estimation in childhood. Information Sciences 178(20), 3860– 3866 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Melluish, T., Saunders, C., Nouretdinov, I., Vovk, V.: Comparing the Bayes and Typicalness frameworks. In: Proceedings 12th European Conference on Machine Learning (ECML'01), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2167, pp. 360–371. Springer (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nouretdinov, I., Melluish, T., Vovk, V.: Ridge regression confidence machine. In: Proceedings 18th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML'01), pp. 385–392. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nouretdinov, I., Vovk, V., Vyugin, M.V., Gammerman, A.: Pattern recognition and density estimation under the general i.i.d. assumption. In: Proceedings 14th Annual Conference on Computational Learning Theory and 5th European Conference on Computational Learning Theory, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2111, pp. 337–353. Springer (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ohmann, C., Moustakis, V., Yang, Q., Lang, K.: Evaluation of automatic knowledge acquisition techniques in the diagnosis of acute abdominal pain. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 8(1), 23–36 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Papadopoulos, H.: Tools in Artificial Intelligence, chap. 18. Inductive Conformal Prediction: Theory and Application to Neural Networks, pp. 315–330. I-Tech, Vienna, Austria (2008). URL
  15. 15.
    Papadopoulos, H., Gammerman, A., Vovk, V.: Normalized nonconformity measures for regression conformal prediction. In: Proceedings IASTED International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Applications (AIA 2008), pp. 64–69. ACTA Press (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Papadopoulos, H., Proedrou, K., Vovk, V., Gammerman, A.: Inductive confidence machines for regression. In: Proceedings 13th European Conference on Machine Learning (ECML'02), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2430, pp. 345–356. Springer (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Papadopoulos, H., Vovk, V., Gammerman, A.: Qualified predictions for large data sets in the case of pattern recognition. In: Proceedings 2002 International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA'02), pp. 159–163. CSREA Press (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Papadopoulos, H., Vovk, V., Gammerman, A.: Conformal prediction with neural networks. In: Proceedings 19th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (IC-TAI'07), vol. 2, pp. 388–395. IEEE Computer Society (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pattichis, C., Christodoulou, C., Kyriacou, E., Pattichis, M.: Artificial neural networks in medical imaging systems. In: Proceedings 1st MEDINF International Conference on Medical Informatics and Engineering, pp. 83–91 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pesonen, E., Eskelinen, M., Juhola, M.: Comparison of different neural network algorithms in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. International Journal of Bio-Medical Computing 40(3), 227–233 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Proedrou, K., Nouretdinov, I., Vovk, V., Gammerman, A.: Transductive confidence machines for pattern recognition. In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Machine Learning (ECML'02), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2430, pp. 381–390. Springer (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Saunders, C., Gammerman, A., Vovk, V.: Transduction with confidence and credibility. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2, pp. 722–726. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA (1999)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Saunders, C., Gammerman, A., Vovk, V.: Computationally efficient transductive machines. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Algorithmic Learning Theory (ALT'00), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1968, pp. 325–333. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vovk, V., Gammerman, A., Shafer, G.: Algorithmic Learning in a Random World. Springer, New York (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zorman, M., Eich, H.P., Kokol, P., Ohmann, C.: Comparison of three databases with a decision tree approach in the medical field of acute appendicitis. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 84(2), 1414–1418 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harris Papadopoulos
    • 1
  • Alex Gammerman
    • 2
  • Volodya Vovk
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science and Engineering DepartmentFrederick UniversityPalou-riotisa, NicosiaCyprus
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science, Royal HollowayUniversity of London, Egham Hill, EghamSurreyEngland

Personalised recommendations