Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31912208›Full record

ArticleIntensive care medicine2020

Early diagnosis of bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit using machine-learning algorithms.

Michael Roimi, Ami Neuberger, Anat Shrot, Mical Paul, Yuval Geffen, Yaron Bar-Lavie

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive care medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael RoimiIntensive Care Unit, Rambam Health Care Campus, HaAliya HaShniya St 8, 31096, Haifa, Israel. m_roimi@rambam.health.gov.il.ORCID 0000-0001-5986-7643
Ami NeubergerInfectious Disease Division, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.
Anat Shrot, Haifa, Israel.
Mical PaulHead of Infectious Disease Division, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.
Yuval GeffenHead of the Microbiologic Laboratory, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.
Yaron Bar-LavieHead of Intensive Care Division, Rambam Health Care Campus, Chairman of the Israeli Society of Intensive Care Medicine, Haifa, Israel.
Rambam Health Care Campus · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to develop a machine-learning (ML) algorithm that can predict intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired bloodstream infections (BSI) among patients suspected of infection in the ICU.

methodsThe study was based on patients' electronic health records at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston, Massachusetts, USA, and at Rambam Health Care Campus (RHCC), Haifa, Israel. We included adults from whom blood cultures were collected for suspected BSI at least 48 h after admission. Clinical data, including time-series variables and their interactions, were analyzed by an ML algorithm at each site. Prediction ability for ICU-acquired BSI was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) of ten-fold cross-validation and validation sets with 95% confidence intervals.

resultsThe datasets comprised 2351 patients from BIDMC (151 with BSI) and 1021 from RHCC (162 with BSI). The median (inter-quartile range) age was 62 (51-75) and 56 (38-69) years, respectively; the median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were 26 (21-32) and 24 (20-29), respectively. The means of the cross-validation AUROCs were 0.87 ± 0.02 for BIDMC and 0.93 ± 0.03 for RHCC. AUROCs of 0.89 ± 0.01 and 0.92 ± 0.02 were maintained in both centers with internal validation, while external validation deteriorated. Valuable predictors were mainly the trends of time-series variables such as laboratory results and vital signs.

conclusionAn ML approach that uses temporal and site-specific data achieved high performance in recognizing BC samples with a high probability for ICU-acquired BSI.

Indexed as

BacteremiaSepsisAdultAlgorithmsBostonEarly DiagnosisHumansIntensive Care UnitsMachine LearningMassachusettsBacteremiaEarly diagnosisIntensive care unitMachine learningNosocomial infection

Identifiers

PMID31912208
OpenAlexW3000574586

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.