Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30973386›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery2020

Utilizing Machine Learning Methods for Preoperative Prediction of Postsurgical Mortality and Intensive Care Unit Admission.

Calvin J Chiew, Nan Liu, Ting Hway Wong, Yilin E Sim, Hairil R Abdullah

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Calvin J ChiewHealth Services Research Unit, Division of Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Nan LiuHealth Services Research Centre, Singapore Health Services, Singapore.
Ting Hway WongHealth Services Research Unit, Division of Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Yilin E SimDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Hairil R AbdullahDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the performance of machine learning models against the traditionally derived Combined Assessment of Risk Encountered in Surgery (CARES) model and the American Society of Anaesthesiologists-Physical Status (ASA-PS) in the prediction of 30-day postsurgical mortality and need for intensive care unit (ICU) stay >24 hours.

backgroundPrediction of surgical risk preoperatively is important for clinical shared decision-making and planning of health resources such as ICU beds. The current growth of electronic medical records coupled with machine learning presents an opportunity to improve the performance of established risk models.

methodsAll patients aged 18 years and above who underwent noncardiac and nonneurological surgery at Singapore General Hospital (SGH) between 1 January 2012 and 31 October 2016 were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, preoperative laboratory results, and surgery details were obtained from their electronic medical records. Seventy percent of the observations were randomly selected for training, leaving 30% for testing. Baseline models were CARES and ASA-PS. Candidate models were trained using random forest, adaptive boosting, gradient boosting, and support vector machine. Models were evaluated on area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC).

resultsA total of 90,785 patients were included, of whom 539 (0.6%) died within 30 days and 1264 (1.4%) required ICU admission >24 hours postoperatively. Baseline models achieved high AUROCs despite poor sensitivities by predicting all negative in a predominantly negative dataset. Gradient boosting was the best performing model with AUPRCs of 0.23 and 0.38 for mortality and ICU admission outcomes respectively.

conclusionsMachine learning can be used to improve surgical risk prediction compared to traditional risk calculators. AUPRC should be used to evaluate model predictive performance instead of AUROC when the dataset is imbalanced.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsMachine LearningAdultAgedFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPreoperative PeriodPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID30973386
PMCPMC7668340

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.