Skip to main content

A Comparative Study: Classification Vs. Matrix Factorization for Therapeutics Recommendation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Foundations of Intelligent Systems (ISMIS 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 13515))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 805 Accesses

Abstract

Hospital information systems (HIS) hold various healthcare information of patients. Most of them are held as structural data by a database table. This information include history of diagnoses, medications, applied procedures and laboratory results of patients which can be used by machine learning methods to predict some useful information about patients. These predictions can be the progress of a disease, which is called prognosis, or it can also be therapeutics which includes medications and procedures. In this paper, we explain how to recommend therapeutics using various machine learning approaches, especially by comparing classification methods with matrix factorization (a recommender systems approach). In order to evaluate the performance of compared methods, we applied experiments on real patients’ electronic health records (EHR). We observed that matrix factorization outperforms the compared classification approaches in terms of accuracy. Therefore, it is feasible to employ matrix factorization in clinical decision support systems to provide therapeutics recommendations which improves the daily performance of physicians, so the life quality of the patients.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • 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.sozialministerium.at/dam/sozialministeriumat/Anlagen/Themen/Ge- sundheit/Krankenanstalten/LKF-Modell-2022/Kataloge-2022/LEISTUNGSKATALOG-BMSGPK-2022.pdf.

  2. 2.

    https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.multioutput.MultiOut- putClassifier.html.

  3. 3.

    https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.neighbors.KNeighbors- Classifier.html.

  4. 4.

    https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.ensemble.RandomFore- stClassifier.html.

  5. 5.

    https://keras.io/guides/sequential_model/.

  6. 6.

    https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.sparse.linalg.svds.html.

References

  1. Abdi, H.: Singular value decomposition (svd) and generalized singular value decomposition. Encycl. of Measur. Stat. 907–912 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Castillo, R.S., Kelemen, A.: Considerations for a successful clinical decision support system. CIN: Comput. Inf. Nurs. 31(7), 319–326 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Chaudhary, A., Kolhe, S., Kamal, R.: An improved random forest classifier for multi-class classification. Inf. Process. Agric. 3(4), 215–222 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Devetyarov, D., Nouretdinov, I.: Prediction with confidence based on a random forest classifier. In: Papadopoulos, H., Andreou, A.S., Bramer, M. (eds.) AIAI 2010. IAICT, vol. 339, pp. 37–44. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16239-8_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Erdeniz, S.P., Felfernig, A., Samer, R., Atas, M.: Matrix factorization based heuristics for constraint-based recommenders. In: Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 1655–1662 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Felfernig, A., et al.: An overview of recommender systems in the internet of things. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 52(2), 285–309 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10844-018-0530-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hallinan, B., Striphas, T.: recommended for you: the Netflix prize and the production of algorithmic culture. New Media Soc. 18(1), 117–137 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hao, F., Blair, R.H.: A comparative study: classification vs. user-based collaborative filtering for clinical prediction. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 16(1), 1–14 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Khanzode, K.C.A., Sarode, R.D.: Advantages and disadvantages of artificial intelligence and machine learning: a literature review. Int. J. Libr. Inf. Sci. (IJLIS) 9(1), 3 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Koren, Y., Bell, R., Volinsky, C.: Matrix factorization techniques for recommender systems. Computer 42(8), 30–37 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mucherino, A., Papajorgji, P.J., Pardalos, P.M.: K-nearest neighbor classification. In: Data mining in agriculture, vol. 34, pp. 83–106. Springer, New York (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-88615-2_4

  12. Novaković, J.D., Veljović, A., Ilić, S.S., Papić, Ž, Milica, T.: Evaluation of classification models in machine learning. Theor Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 7(1), 39–46 (2017)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. O’malley, K.J., Cook, K.F., Price, M.D., Wildes, K.R., Hurdle, J.F., Ashton, C.M.: Measuring diagnoses: ICD code accuracy. Health Serv. Res. 40(5p2), 1620–1639 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Organization, W.H., et al.: Therapeutics and covid-19: living guideline, 31 March 2021. World Health Organization, Technical Report (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Piatetsky, G.: Interview with simon funk. Acm Sigkdd Explor. Newsl. 9(1), 38–40 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schrempf, M., Kramer, D., Jauk, S., Veeranki, S.P., Leodolter, W., Rainer, P.P.: Machine learning based risk prediction for major adverse cardiovascular events. In: Navigating Healthcare Through Challenging Times, pp. 136–143. IOS Press (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang, G.P.: Neural networks for classification: a survey. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C (Appl. Rev.) 30(4), 451–462 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seda Polat Erdeniz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Polat Erdeniz, S., Schrempf, M., Kramer, D., Felfernig, A. (2022). A Comparative Study: Classification Vs. Matrix Factorization for Therapeutics Recommendation. In: Ceci, M., Flesca, S., Masciari, E., Manco, G., Raś, Z.W. (eds) Foundations of Intelligent Systems. ISMIS 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13515. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16564-1_45

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16564-1_45

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-16563-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-16564-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics