Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32092108›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Prediction of perioperative transfusions using an artificial neural network.

Steven Walczak, Vic Velanovich

Registry-linked trialAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05228548 (Development and Interpretation of a Machine Learning Model for Perioperative Transfusion Prediction), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT05228548 completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Development and Interpretation of a Machine Learning Model for Perioperative Transfusion Prediction

TypeobservationalSponsorDiskapi Teaching and Research HospitalRan2022 to 2022Enrolled6,121ConditionsSurgery, Blood TransfusionArmsPerioperative blood transfusion
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  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
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

2 authors.

Steven WalczakSchool of Information, Florida Center for Cybersecurity, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0449-6272
Vic VelanovichDepartment of Surgery, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate prediction of operative transfusions is essential for resource allocation and identifying patients at risk of postoperative adverse events. This research examines the efficacy of using artificial neural networks (ANNs) to predict transfusions for all inpatient operations.

methodsOver 1.6 million surgical cases over a two year period from the NSQIP-PUF database are used. Data from 2014 (750937 records) are used for model development and data from 2015 (885502 records) are used for model validation. ANN and regression models are developed to predict perioperative transfusions for surgical patients.

resultsVarious ANN models and logistic regression, using four variable sets, are compared. The best performing ANN models with respect to both sensitivity and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve outperformed all of the regression models (p < .001) and achieved a performance of 70-80% specificity with a corresponding 75-62% sensitivity.

conclusionANNs can predict >75% of the patients who will require transfusion and 70% of those who will not. Increasing specificity to 80% still enables a sensitivity of almost 67%. The unique contribution of this research is the utilization of a single ANN model to predict transfusions across a broad range of surgical procedures.

Indexed as

Blood TransfusionComputer SimulationNeural Networks, ComputerPerioperative CareAge FactorsDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansMachine LearningMalePostoperative HemorrhagePrognosisRisk FactorsSensitivity and SpecificitySex Factors

Identifiers

PMID32092108
PMCPMC7039514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.