Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30500816›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2018

Characterising risk of in-hospital mortality following cardiac arrest using machine learning: A retrospective international registry study.

Shane Nanayakkara, Sam Fogarty, Michael Tremeer, Kelvin Ross, Brent Richards, Christoph Bergmeir, Sheng Xu, Dion Stub, Karen Smith, Mark Tacey and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing 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

55 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Machine Learning and Clinical Predictors of Mortality in Cardiac Arrest Patients: A Comprehensive Analysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Shane NanayakkaraDepartment of Cardiology, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0146-6588
Sam FogartyInstitute for Integrated and Intelligent Systems, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Michael TremeerIntelliHQ, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Kelvin RossInstitute for Integrated and Intelligent Systems, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9650-2819
Brent RichardsIntelliHQ, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2613-0308
Christoph BergmeirFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3665-9021
Sheng XuFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Dion StubDepartment of Cardiology, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Karen SmithCentre for Research and Evaluation, Ambulance Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Mark TaceySchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Danny LiewSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
David PilcherSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8939-7985
David M KayeDepartment of Cardiology, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4058-0372

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResuscitated cardiac arrest is associated with high mortality; however, the ability to estimate risk of adverse outcomes using existing illness severity scores is limited. Using in-hospital data available within the first 24 hours of admission, we aimed to develop more accurate models of risk prediction using both logistic regression (LR) and machine learning (ML) techniques, with a combination of demographic, physiologic, and biochemical information. METHODS AND

findingsPatient-level data were extracted from the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Adult Patient Database for patients who had experienced a cardiac arrest within 24 hours prior to admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) during the period January 2006 to December 2016. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The models were trained and tested on a dataset (split 90:10) including age, lowest and highest physiologic variables during the first 24 hours, and key past medical history. LR and 5 ML approaches (gradient boosting machine [GBM], support vector classifier [SVC], random forest [RF], artificial neural network [ANN], and an ensemble) were compared to the APACHE III and Australian and New Zealand Risk of Death (ANZROD) predictions. In all, 39,566 patients from 186 ICUs were analysed. Mean (±SD) age was 61 ± 17 years; 65% were male. Overall in-hospital mortality was 45.5%. Models were evaluated in the test set. The APACHE III and ANZROD scores demonstrated good discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.80 [95% CI 0.79-0.82] and 0.81 [95% CI 0.8-0.82], respectively) and modest calibration (Brier score 0.19 for both), which was slightly improved by LR (AUROC = 0.82 [95% CI 0.81-0.83], DeLong test, p < 0.001). Discrimination was significantly improved using ML models (ensemble and GBM AUROCs = 0.87 [95% CI 0.86-0.88], DeLong test, p < 0.001), with an improvement in performance (Brier score reduction of 22%). Explainability models were created to assist in identifying the physiologic features that most contributed to an individual patient's survival. Key limitations include the absence of pre-hospital data and absence of external validation.

conclusionsML approaches significantly enhance predictive discrimination for mortality following cardiac arrest compared to existing illness severity scores and LR, without the use of pre-hospital data. The discriminative ability of these ML models requires validation in external cohorts to establish generalisability.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesHospital MortalityMachine LearningAgedAustraliaCardiopulmonary ResuscitationClinical Decision-MakingDatabases, FactualFemaleHealth StatusHeart ArrestHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandRegistries

Identifiers

PMID30500816
PMCPMC6267953

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.