Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32033607›Full record

ArticleRespiratory research2020

Diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia using electronic nose sensor array signals: solutions to improve the application of machine learning in respiratory research.

Chung-Yu Chen, Wei-Chi Lin, Hsiao-Yu Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Respiratory research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

3 authors.

Chung-Yu ChenDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital Yunlin Branch, Douliu, Taiwan.
Wei-Chi LinInstitute of Occupational Medicine and Industrial Hygiene, National Taiwan University College of Public Health, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hsiao-Yu YangInstitute of Occupational Medicine and Industrial Hygiene, National Taiwan University College of Public Health, Taipei, Taiwan. hyang@ntu.edu.tw.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5298-2462

Funding

Ministry of Education NTU-107L9003Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 106-2314-B-002-107, 107-2314-B-002-198, 108-2918-I-002-031, 107-3017-F-002-003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVentilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a significant cause of mortality in the intensive care unit. Early diagnosis of VAP is important to provide appropriate treatment and reduce mortality. Developing a noninvasive and highly accurate diagnostic method is important. The invention of electronic sensors has been applied to analyze the volatile organic compounds in breath to detect VAP using a machine learning technique. However, the process of building an algorithm is usually unclear and prevents physicians from applying the artificial intelligence technique in clinical practice. Clear processes of model building and assessing accuracy are warranted. The objective of this study was to develop a breath test for VAP with a standardized protocol for a machine learning technique.

methodsWe conducted a case-control study. This study enrolled subjects in an intensive care unit of a hospital in southern Taiwan from February 2017 to June 2019. We recruited patients with VAP as the case group and ventilated patients without pneumonia as the control group. We collected exhaled breath and analyzed the electric resistance changes of 32 sensor arrays of an electronic nose. We split the data into a set for training algorithms and a set for testing. We applied eight machine learning algorithms to build prediction models, improving model performance and providing an estimated diagnostic accuracy.

resultsA total of 33 cases and 26 controls were used in the final analysis. Using eight machine learning algorithms, the mean accuracy in the testing set was 0.81 ± 0.04, the sensitivity was 0.79 ± 0.08, the specificity was 0.83 ± 0.00, the positive predictive value was 0.85 ± 0.02, the negative predictive value was 0.77 ± 0.06, and the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves was 0.85 ± 0.04. The mean kappa value in the testing set was 0.62 ± 0.08, which suggested good agreement.

conclusionsThere was good accuracy in detecting VAP by sensor array and machine learning techniques. Artificial intelligence has the potential to assist the physician in making a clinical diagnosis. Clear protocols for data processing and the modeling procedure needed to increase generalizability.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBiomedical ResearchCase-Control StudiesDecision TreesElectronic NoseFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedPneumonia, Ventilator-AssociatedRespiratory MechanicsBreath testElectronic noseMachine learningVentilator-associated pneumoniaVolatile organic compounds

Identifiers

PMID32033607
PMCPMC7006122

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.