Novel hybridized learning-based model for heart disease prediction using PCA and deep learning


Abstract

Heart disease (HD) remains a critical health issue globally, leading to high rates of death and requiring complex, expensive diagnostic processes. The extensive influence of heart failure on morbidity and mortality rates highlights the need for precise and timely diagnosis to facilitate effective prevention, early detection, and treatment, ultimately reducing health risks. However, predicting HD accurately and early is a difficult job due to the complexity of medical data, which healthcare professionals must rapidly decipher for effective treatment. Moreover, the variety of criteria used by different feature selection (FS) algorithms complicates the identification of the most effective method. Hybrid approaches that combine multiple FS methods can address the shortcomings of single-method strategies. To solve the challenges of high-dimensionality and performance constraints, a novel hybrid learning-based model (NHLBM) for predicting HD is introduced. Our method uses two specific strategies: principal component analysis and the Deep Autoencoder (DAE). We evaluated the effectiveness of the NHLBM using the public Z-Alizadeh Sani dataset and nine machine-learning techniques. The NHLBM demonstrates remarkable performance improvements, identifying an optimal dimension for HD prediction, refining its representation through DAE, and achieving up to a 9\% increase in predictive accuracy. We found that the NHLBM gets an amazing 87.91\% accuracy rate when it uses logistic regression with scaling method, optimal parameterization, and a data split ratio of 70:30. Furthermore, the second strategy significantly improved the NHLBM's accuracy over the first, marking a notable progression in the domain of medical prediction and diagnosis of HD.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].