Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30767136›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2019

Predicting tachycardia as a surrogate for instability in the intensive care unit.

Joo Heung Yoon, Lidan Mu, Lujie Chen, Artur Dubrawski, Marilyn Hravnak, Michael R Pinsky, Gilles Clermont

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Artificial Intelligence in Critical Care Medicine.Critical care (London, England) · 2022
    Review
  13. Intelligent Clinical Decision Support.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Artificial Intelligence in the Intensive Care Unit.Critical care (London, England) · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Joo Heung YoonDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. yoonjh@upmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0127-8384
Lidan MuAuton Lab, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Lujie ChenAuton Lab, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Artur DubrawskiAuton Lab, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Marilyn HravnakSchool of Nursing, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Michael R PinskyDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Gilles ClermontDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Funding

Translational Training Program in Pulmonary Biology and MedicineT32HL007563 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Melanie Koenigshoff · 1985 to 2026
$12.3M
Multidisciplinary Training in Critical Care Outcomes ResearchT32HL007820 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Timothy D Girard, Jeremy M Kahn · 1996 to 2026
$6.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007563NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007820NIH HHS 1R01HL126811NIH HHS 5T32HL007820
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tachycardia is a strong though non-specific marker of cardiovascular stress that proceeds hemodynamic instability. We designed a predictive model of tachycardia using multi-granular intensive care unit (ICU) data by creating a risk score and dynamic trajectory. A subset of clinical and numerical signals were extracted from the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care II database. A tachycardia episode was defined as heart rate ≥ 130/min lasting for ≥ 5 min, with ≥ 10% density. Regularized logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF) classifiers were trained to create a risk score for upcoming tachycardia. Three different risk score models were compared for tachycardia and control (non-tachycardia) groups. Risk trajectory was generated from time windows moving away at 1 min increments from the tachycardia episode. Trajectories were computed over 3 hours leading up to the episode for three different models. From 2809 subjects, 787 tachycardia episodes and 707 control periods were identified. Patients with tachycardia had increased vasopressor support, longer ICU stay, and increased ICU mortality than controls. In model evaluation, RF was slightly superior to LR, which accuracy ranged from 0.847 to 0.782, with area under the curve from 0.921 to 0.842. Risk trajectory analysis showed average risks for tachycardia group evolved to 0.78 prior to the tachycardia episodes, while control group risks remained < 0.3. Among the three models, the internal control model demonstrated evolving trajectory approximately 75 min before tachycardia episode. Clinically relevant tachycardia episodes can be predicted from vital sign time series using machine learning algorithms.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAlgorithmsArea Under CurveCardiovascular DiseasesCritical CareDatabases, FactualData CollectionElectronic Health RecordsHeart RateHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsLogistic ModelsLung DiseasesMachine LearningCritical CareIntensive care unitMachine learningPredictionTachycardia

Identifiers

PMID30767136
PMCPMC6823304

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.