Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27182460›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence2015

A Multivariate Timeseries Modeling Approach to Severity of Illness Assessment and Forecasting in ICU with Sparse, Heterogeneous Clinical Data.

Marzyeh Ghassemi, Marco A F Pimentel, Tristan Naumann, Thomas Brennan, David A Clifton, Peter Szolovits, Mengling Feng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. MUSE-Net: Missingness-aware mUlti-branching Self-attention Encoder for Irregular Longitudinal Electronic Health Records.IEEE transactions on automation science and engineering : a publication of the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Online model selection by learning how compositional kernels evolve.Transactions on machine learning research · 2023
    Article
  11. Machine Learning for Benchmarking Critical Care Outcomes.Healthcare informatics research · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. mRisk: Continuous Risk Estimation for Smoking Lapse from Noisy Sensor Data with Incomplete and Positive-Only Labels.Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Heteroscedastic Temporal Variational Autoencoder for Irregular Time Series.... International Conference on Learning Representations · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Marzyeh GhassemiComputer Science, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA.
Marco A F PimentelEngineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Tristan NaumannComputer Science, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Thomas BrennanHealth Science Technology, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
David A CliftonEngineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Peter SzolovitsComputer Science, MIT Cambridge, MA.
Mengling FengHealth Science Technology, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Funding

RESEARCH TRAINING-MEDICAL INFORMATICS 90T15LM007092 · NLM · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI Nils Gehlenborg · 1992 to 2026
$32.8M
Integrating Data, Models, and Reasoning in Critical CareR01EB001659 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI MARK, ROGER GREENWOOD · 2003 to 2012
$9.8M
Critical Care Informatics: Ethical considerations around the use and sharing of health-related dataR01EB017205 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI CELI, LEO ANTHONY G, MARK, ROGER GREENWOOD · 2014 to 2021
$3.8M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB001659NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB017205NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007092Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to determine patient acuity (or severity of illness) has immediate practical use for clinicians. We evaluate the use of multivariate timeseries modeling with the multi-task Gaussian process (GP) models using noisy, incomplete, sparse, heterogeneous and unevenly-sampled clinical data, including both physiological signals and clinical notes. The learned multi-task GP (MTGP) hyperparameters are then used to assess and forecast patient acuity. Experiments were conducted with two real clinical data sets acquired from ICU patients: firstly, estimating cerebrovascular pressure reactivity, an important indicator of secondary damage for traumatic brain injury patients, by learning the interactions between intracranial pressure and mean arterial blood pressure signals, and secondly, mortality prediction using clinical progress notes. In both cases, MTGPs provided improved results: an MTGP model provided better results than single-task GP models for signal interpolation and forecasting (0.91 vs 0.69 RMSE), and the use of MTGP hyperparameters obtained improved results when used as additional classification features (0.812 vs 0.788 AUC).

Identifiers

PMID27182460
PMCPMC4864016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.