Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32240233›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Risk of mortality and cardiopulmonary arrest in critical patients presenting to the emergency department using machine learning and natural language processing.

Marta Fernandes, Rúben Mendes, Susana M Vieira, Francisca Leite, Carlos Palos, Alistair Johnson, Stan Finkelstein, Steven Horng, Leo Anthony Celi

Abstract read
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. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Using natural language processing in emergency medicine health service research: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

9 authors.

Marta FernandesIDMEC, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-7203-2832
Rúben MendesIDMEC, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Susana M VieiraIDMEC, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Francisca LeiteHospital da Luz Learning Health, Lisbon, Portugal.
Carlos PalosHospital Beatriz Ângelo, Luz Saúde, Lisbon, Portugal.
Alistair JohnsonMIT Critical Data, Laboratory for Computational Physiology, Harvard-MIT Health Sciences & Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Stan FinkelsteinInstitute for Data, Systems and Society, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Steven HorngDepartment of Emergency Medicine / Division of Clinical Informatics / Center for Healthcare Delivery Science, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Leo Anthony CeliMIT Critical Data, Laboratory for Computational Physiology, Harvard-MIT Health Sciences & Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emergency department triage is the first point in time when a patient's acuity level is determined. The time to assign a priority at triage is short and it is vital to accurately stratify patients at this stage, since under-triage can lead to increased morbidity, mortality and costs. Our aim was to present a model that can assist healthcare professionals in triage decision making, namely in the stratification of patients through the risk prediction of a composite critical outcome-mortality and cardiopulmonary arrest. Our study cohort consisted of 235826 adult patients triaged at a Portuguese Emergency Department from 2012 to 2016. Patients were assigned to emergent, very urgent or urgent priorities of the Manchester Triage System (MTS). Demographics, clinical variables routinely collected at triage and the patients' chief complaint were used. Logistic regression, random forests and extreme gradient boosting were developed using all available variables. The term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF) natural language processing weighting factor was applied to vectorize the chief complaint. Stratified random sampling was used to split the data into train (70%) and test (30%) data sets. Ten-fold cross validation was performed in train to optimize model hyper-parameters. The performance obtained with the best model was compared against the reference model-a regularized logistic regression trained using only triage priorities. Extreme gradient boosting exhibited good calibration properties and yielded areas under the receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall curves of 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.97) and 0.31 (95% CI 0.26-0.36), respectively. The predictors ranked with higher importance by this model were the Glasgow coma score, the patients' age, pulse oximetry and arrival mode. Compared to the reference, the extreme gradient boosting model using clinical variables and the chief complaint presented higher recall for patients assigned MTS-3 and can identify those who are at risk of the composite outcome.

Indexed as

AdultCohort StudiesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleForecastingHeart ArrestHospitalizationHumansLogistic ModelsMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedNatural Language ProcessingPatient AcuityPortugalRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID32240233
PMCPMC7117713

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.