ReviewMedical & biological engineering & computing2020
A machine learning approach for mortality prediction only using non-invasive parameters.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of feature combinations on machine learning models for in-hospital mortality prediction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The impact of knowledge of hospitalization on mortality predictions.Health services & outcomes research methodology · 2025Article
- Article
- Opioid Nonadherence Risk Prediction of Patients with Cancer-Related Pain Based on Five Machine Learning Algorithms.Pain research & management · 2024Article
- Predicting mortality and visualizing health care spending by predicted mortality in Danes over age 65.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Development and deployment of interpretable machine-learning model for predicting in-hospital mortality in elderly patients with acute kidney disease.Renal failure · 2022Article
- Dynamic prediction of life-threatening events for patients in intensive care unit.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Predicting mortality in the very old: a machine learning analysis on claims data.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Machine learning to predict in-hospital mortality among patients with severe obesity: Proof of concept study.Obesity science & practice · 2022Article
- Simulation of the COVID-19 patient flow and investigation of the future patient arrival using a time-series prediction model: a real-case study.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2022Article
- Development of machine learning models for mortality risk prediction after cardiac surgery.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2022Article
- Article
- Predicting bloodstream infection outcome using machine learning.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Predicting presumed serious infection among hospitalized children on central venous lines with machine learning.Computers in biology and medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
32691219What OpenQuestion holds
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.