» Articles » PMID: 30840682

Exploring the Use of Machine Learning for Risk Adjustment: A Comparison of Standard and Penalized Linear Regression Models in Predicting Health Care Costs in Older Adults

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2019 Mar 7
PMID 30840682
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Payers and providers still primarily use ordinary least squares (OLS) to estimate expected economic and clinical outcomes for risk adjustment purposes. Penalized linear regression represents a practical and incremental step forward that provides transparency and interpretability within the familiar regression framework. This study conducted an in-depth comparison of prediction performance of standard and penalized linear regression in predicting future health care costs in older adults.

Methods And Findings: This retrospective cohort study included 81,106 Medicare Advantage patients with 5 years of continuous medical and pharmacy insurance from 2009 to 2013. Total health care costs in 2013 were predicted with comorbidity indicators from 2009 to 2012. Using 2012 predictors only, OLS performed poorly (e.g., R2 = 16.3%) compared to penalized linear regression models (R2 ranging from 16.8 to 16.9%); using 2009-2012 predictors, the gap in prediction performance increased (R2:15.0% versus 18.0-18.2%). OLS with a reduced set of predictors selected by lasso showed improved performance (R2 = 16.6% with 2012 predictors, 17.4% with 2009-2012 predictors) relative to OLS without variable selection but still lagged behind the prediction performance of penalized regression. Lasso regression consistently generated prediction ratios closer to 1 across different levels of predicted risk compared to other models.

Conclusions: This study demonstrated the advantages of using transparent and easy-to-interpret penalized linear regression for predicting future health care costs in older adults relative to standard linear regression. Penalized regression showed better performance than OLS in predicting health care costs. Applying penalized regression to longitudinal data increased prediction accuracy. Lasso regression in particular showed superior prediction ratios across low and high levels of predicted risk. Health care insurers, providers and policy makers may benefit from adopting penalized regression such as lasso regression for cost prediction to improve risk adjustment and population health management and thus better address the underlying needs and risk of the populations they serve.

Citing Articles

Algorithms to Improve Fairness in Medicare Risk Adjustment.

Reitsma M, McGuire T, Rose S medRxiv. 2025; .

PMID: 39974004 PMC: 11838972. DOI: 10.1101/2025.01.25.25321057.


Topical Biocomposites Based on Collagen, Hyaluronic Acid and Metronidazole as Periodontitis Treatment.

Albu Kaya M, Simonca A, Rau I, Coman A, Marin M, Popa L Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024; 17(10).

PMID: 39458977 PMC: 11510136. DOI: 10.3390/ph17101336.


Variational Bayes machine learning for risk adjustment of general outcome indicators with examples in urology.

Koh H, Gasevic D, Rankin D, Heritier S, Frydenberg M, Talic S NPJ Digit Med. 2024; 7(1):249.

PMID: 39277683 PMC: 11401950. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01244-z.


How to mitigate the risks of deployment of artificial intelligence in medicine?.

Uygun Ilikhan S, Ozer M, Tanberkan H, Bozkurt V Turk J Med Sci. 2024; 54(3):483-492.

PMID: 39050000 PMC: 11265878. DOI: 10.55730/1300-0144.5814.


Performance of ChatGPT on the Chinese Postgraduate Examination for Clinical Medicine: Survey Study.

Yu P, Fang C, Liu X, Fu W, Ling J, Yan Z JMIR Med Educ. 2024; 10:e48514.

PMID: 38335017 PMC: 10891494. DOI: 10.2196/48514.


References
1.
Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R . Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent. J Stat Softw. 2010; 33(1):1-22. PMC: 2929880. View

2.
Hatef E, Kharrazi H, VanBaak E, Falcone M, Ferris L, Mertz K . A State-wide Health IT Infrastructure for Population Health: Building a Community-wide Electronic Platform for Maryland's All-Payer Global Budget. Online J Public Health Inform. 2018; 9(3):e195. PMC: 5790428. DOI: 10.5210/ojphi.v9i3.8129. View

3.
Kharrazi H, Gonzalez C, Lowe K, Huerta T, Ford E . Forecasting the Maturation of Electronic Health Record Functions Among US Hospitals: Retrospective Analysis and Predictive Model. J Med Internet Res. 2018; 20(8):e10458. PMC: 6104443. DOI: 10.2196/10458. View

4.
Tamang S, Milstein A, Sorensen H, Pedersen L, Mackey L, Betterton J . Predicting patient 'cost blooms' in Denmark: a longitudinal population-based study. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(1):e011580. PMC: 5253526. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011580. View

5.
Chang H, Richards T, Shermock K, Dalpoas S, Kan H, Alexander G . Evaluating the Impact of Prescription Fill Rates on Risk Stratification Model Performance. Med Care. 2017; 55(12):1052-1060. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000825. View