{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.036290322580645164, 'fraction_numerical': 0.029233870967741934, 'mean_word_length': 5.572847682119205, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Value of a Machine Learning Approach for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Young Patients With Hypertension

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Risk stratification of young patients with hypertension remains challenging. Generally, machine learning (ML) is considered a promising alternative to traditional methods for clinical predictions because it is capable of processing large amounts of complex data. We, therefore, explored the feasibility of an ML approach for predicting outcomes in young patients with hypertension and compared its performance with that of approaches now commonly used in clinical practice. Baseline clinical data and a composite end point—comprising all-cause death, acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery revascularization, new-onset heart failure, new-onset atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter, sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, peripheral artery revascularization, new-onset stroke, end-stage renal disease—were evaluated in 508 young patients with hypertension (30.83±6.17 years) who had been treated at a tertiary hospital. Construction of the ML model, which consisted of recursive feature elimination, extreme gradient boosting, and 10-fold cross-validation, was performed at the 33-month follow-up evaluation, and the model’s performance was compared with that of the Cox regression and recalibrated Framingham Risk Score models. An 11-variable combination was considered most valuable for predicting outcomes using the ML approach. The C statistic for identifying patients with composite end points was 0.757 (95% CI, 0.660–0.854) for the ML model, whereas for Cox regression model and the recalibrated Framingham Risk Score model it was 0.723 (95% CI, 0.636–0.810) and 0.529 (95% CI, 0.403–0.655). The ML approach was comparable with Cox regression for determining the clinical prognosis of young patients with hypertension and was better than that of the recalibrated Framingham Risk Score model.