Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32691219›Full record

ReviewMedical & biological engineering & computing2020

A machine learning approach for mortality prediction only using non-invasive parameters.

Guang Zhang, JiaMeng Xu, Ming Yu, Jing Yuan, Feng Chen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The impact of knowledge of hospitalization on mortality predictions.Health services & outcomes research methodology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Guang ZhangInstitute of Medical Support, Academy of Military Sciences, Tianjin, China. zhangguang01@hotmail.com.
JiaMeng XuInstitute of Medical Support, Academy of Military Sciences, Tianjin, China.
Ming YuInstitute of Medical Support, Academy of Military Sciences, Tianjin, China.
Jing YuanInstitute of Medical Support, Academy of Military Sciences, Tianjin, China.
Feng ChenInstitute of Medical Support, Academy of Military Sciences, Tianjin, China. chenfeng62037@hotmail.com.

Funding

logistics scientific research foundation program at the Military Medical Innovation Project 16CXZ034National Key R&D Program of China 2017YFC0806402, 2017YFC0806404, 2017YFC0806406Science and Technology Program of Tianjin, China 18ZXJMTG00060
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

At present, the traditional scoring methods generally utilize laboratory measurements to predict mortality. It results in difficulties of early mortality prediction in the rural areas lack of professional laboratorians and medical laboratory equipment. To improve the efficiency, accuracy, and applicability of mortality prediction in the remote areas, a novel mortality prediction method based on machine learning algorithms is proposed, which only uses non-invasive parameters readily available from ordinary monitors and manual measurement. A new feature selection method based on the Bayes error rate is developed to select valuable features. Based on non-invasive parameters, four machine learning models were trained for early mortality prediction. The subjects contained in this study suffered from general critical diseases including but not limited to cancer, bone fracture, and diarrhea. Comparison tests among five traditional scoring methods and these four machine learning models with and without laboratory measurement variables are performed. Only using the non-invasive parameters, the LightGBM algorithms have an excellent performance with the largest accuracy of 0.797 and AUC of 0.879. There is no apparent difference between the mortality prediction performance with and without laboratory measurement variables for the four machine learning methods. After reducing the number of feature variables to no more than 50, the machine learning models still outperform the traditional scoring systems, with AUC higher than 0.83. The machine learning approaches only using non-invasive parameters achieved an excellent mortality prediction performance and can equal those using extra laboratory measurements, which can be applied in rural areas and remote battlefield for mortality risk evaluation. Graphical abstract.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsHospital MortalityMachine LearningArea Under CurveCritical CareFemaleHumansMaleMortalityReproducibility of ResultsEarly mortality predictionFeature reductionMachine learningNon-invasive parameters

Identifiers

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.