Data analytics to select markers and cut-off values for clinical scoring

Scoring systems such as the Glasgow-Coma scale used to assess consciousness AusDrisk to assess the risk of diabetes, are prevalent in clinical practice. Scoring systems typically include relevant variables with ordinal values where each value is assigned a weight. Weights for selected values are summed and compared to thresholds for health care professionals to rapidly generate a score. Scoring systems are prevalent in clinical practice because they are easy and quick to use. However, most scoring systems comprise many variables and require some time to calculate an final score. Further, expensive population-wide studies are required to validate a scoring system. In this article, we present a new approach for the generation of a scoring system. The approach uses a search procedure invoking iterative decision tree induction to identify a suite of scoring rules, each of which requires values on only two variables. Twelve scoring rules were discovered using the approach, from an Australian screening program for the assessment of Type 2 Diabetes risk. However, classifications from the 12 rules can conflict. In this paper we argue that a simple rule preference relation is sufficient for the resolution of rule conflicts.