Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30947282›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Improved predictive models for acute kidney injury with IDEA: Intraoperative Data Embedded Analytics.

Lasith Adhikari, Tezcan Ozrazgat-Baslanti, Matthew Ruppert, R W M A Madushani, Srajan Paliwal, Haleh Hashemighouchani, Feng Zheng, Ming Tao, Juliano M Lopes, Xiaolin Li and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Federated Learning for Predicting Major Postoperative Complications.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025
    Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

12 authors.

Lasith AdhikariDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3252-8972
Tezcan Ozrazgat-BaslantiDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Matthew RuppertDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
R W M A MadushaniDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Srajan PaliwalDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Haleh HashemighouchaniDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Feng ZhengPrecision and Intelligent Systems in Medicine (PrismaP), University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Ming TaoDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Juliano M LopesPrecision and Intelligent Systems in Medicine (PrismaP), University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5507-454X
Xiaolin LiPrecision and Intelligent Systems in Medicine (PrismaP), University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Parisa RashidiPrecision and Intelligent Systems in Medicine (PrismaP), University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Azra BihoracDivision of Nephrology, Hypertension and Renal Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5745-2863

Funding

UF Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000064 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI NELSON, DAVID R · 2012 to 2014
$12.2M
PICS: A New Horizon for Surgical Critical CareP50GM111152 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI MOORE, FREDERICK A · 2014 to 2018
$10.7M
Integrating data, algorithms and clinical reasoning for surgical risk assessmentR01GM110240 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI BIHORAC, AZRA, RASHIDI, PARISA · 2016 to 2025
$5.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000064NIGMS NIH HHS P50 GM111152NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM110240
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication after surgery that is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The majority of existing perioperative AKI risk prediction models are limited in their generalizability and do not fully utilize intraoperative physiological time-series data. Thus, there is a need for intelligent, accurate, and robust systems to leverage new information as it becomes available to predict the risk of developing postoperative AKI.

methodsA retrospective single-center cohort of 2,911 adults who underwent surgery at the University of Florida Health between 2000 and 2010 was utilized for this study. Machine learning and statistical analysis techniques were used to develop perioperative models to predict the risk of developing AKI during the first three days after surgery, first seven days after surgery, and overall (after surgery during the index hospitalization). The improvement in risk prediction was examined by incorporating intraoperative physiological time-series variables. Our proposed model enriched a preoperative model that produced a probabilistic AKI risk score by integrating intraoperative statistical features through a machine learning stacking approach inside a random forest classifier. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, and Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI).

resultsThe predictive performance of the proposed model is better than the preoperative data only model. The proposed model had an AUC of 0.86 (accuracy of 0.78) for the seven-day AKI outcome, while the preoperative model had an AUC of 0.84 (accuracy of 0.76). Furthermore, by integrating intraoperative features, the algorithm was able to reclassify 40% of the false negative patients from the preoperative model. The NRI for each outcome was AKI at three days (8%), seven days (7%), and overall (4%).

conclusionsPostoperative AKI prediction was improved with high sensitivity and specificity through a machine learning approach that dynamically incorporated intraoperative data.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryAdultAgedAlgorithmsArea Under CurveCohort StudiesFemaleHumansIntraoperative PeriodMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalPostoperative ComplicationsPredictive Value of TestsPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID30947282
PMCPMC6448850

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.