Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27707820›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017

Understanding vasopressor intervention and weaning: risk prediction in a public heterogeneous clinical time series database.

Mike Wu, Marzyeh Ghassemi, Mengling Feng, Leo A Celi, Peter Szolovits, Finale Doshi-Velez

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Probabilistic Machine Learning for Healthcare.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A Review of Challenges and Opportunities in Machine Learning for Health.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Predicting intervention onset in the ICU with switching state space models.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2017
    Article
  18. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mike WuDepartment of Computer Science, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Marzyeh GhassemiComputer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Mengling FengComputer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Leo A CeliComputer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Peter SzolovitsComputer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Finale Doshi-VelezPaulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology · USHarvard University · USYale University · US

Funding

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 EB017205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe widespread adoption of electronic health records allows us to ask evidence-based questions about the need for and benefits of specific clinical interventions in critical-care settings across large populations.

objectiveWe investigated the prediction of vasopressor administration and weaning in the intensive care unit. Vasopressors are commonly used to control hypotension, and changes in timing and dosage can have a large impact on patient outcomes. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe considered a cohort of 15 695 intensive care unit patients without orders for reduced care who were alive 30 days post-discharge. A switching-state autoregressive model (SSAM) was trained to predict the multidimensional physiological time series of patients before, during, and after vasopressor administration. The latent states from the SSAM were used as predictors of vasopressor administration and weaning.

resultsThe unsupervised SSAM features were able to predict patient vasopressor administration and successful patient weaning. Features derived from the SSAM achieved areas under the receiver operating curve of 0.92, 0.88, and 0.71 for predicting ungapped vasopressor administration, gapped vasopressor administration, and vasopressor weaning, respectively. We also demonstrated many cases where our model predicted weaning well in advance of a successful wean.

conclusionModels that used SSAM features increased performance on both predictive tasks. These improvements may reflect an underlying, and ultimately predictive, latent state detectable from the physiological time series.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalArea Under CurveDatabases, FactualElectronic Health RecordsHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsRisk AssessmentVasoconstrictor AgentsVasoconstrictor Agentsautoregressive modelselectronic health recordslatent variable modelsrisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID27707820
PMCPMC6455107
OpenAlexW2528047932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.