Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33042536›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2020

Mortality prediction model for the triage of COVID-19, pneumonia, and mechanically ventilated ICU patients: A retrospective study.

Logan Ryan, Carson Lam, Samson Mataraso, Angier Allen, Abigail Green-Saxena, Emily Pellegrini, Jana Hoffman, Christopher Barton, Andrea McCoy, Ritankar Das

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Data mining approach to predicting of death in patients with COVID-19.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. [Long short-term memory and Logistic regression for mortality risk prediction of intensive care unit patients with stroke].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2022
    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

10 authors.

Logan RyanDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Carson LamDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Samson MatarasoDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Angier AllenDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abigail Green-SaxenaDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Emily PellegriniDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Jana HoffmanDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Christopher BartonDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.
Andrea McCoyCape Regional Medical Center, Cape May Court House, NJ, USA.
Ritankar DasDascena, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationalePrediction of patients at risk for mortality can help triage patients and assist in resource allocation.

objectivesDevelop and evaluate a machine learning-based algorithm which accurately predicts mortality in COVID-19, pneumonia, and mechanically ventilated patients.

methodsRetrospective study of 53,001 total ICU patients, including 9166 patients with pneumonia and 25,895 mechanically ventilated patients, performed on the MIMIC dataset. An additional retrospective analysis was performed on a community hospital dataset containing 114 patients positive for SARS-COV-2 by PCR test. The outcome of interest was in-hospital patient mortality.

resultsWhen trained and tested on the MIMIC dataset, the XGBoost predictor obtained area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) values of 0.82, 0.81, 0.77, and 0.75 for mortality prediction on mechanically ventilated patients at 12-, 24-, 48-, and 72- hour windows, respectively, and AUROCs of 0.87, 0.78, 0.77, and 0.734 for mortality prediction on pneumonia patients at 12-, 24-, 48-, and 72- hour windows, respectively. The predictor outperformed the qSOFA, MEWS and CURB-65 risk scores at all prediction windows. When tested on the community hospital dataset, the predictor obtained AUROCs of 0.91, 0.90, 0.86, and 0.87 for mortality prediction on COVID-19 patients at 12-, 24-, 48-, and 72- hour windows, respectively, outperforming the qSOFA, MEWS and CURB-65 risk scores at all prediction windows.

conclusionsThis machine learning-based algorithm is a useful predictive tool for anticipating patient mortality at clinically useful timepoints, and is capable of accurate mortality prediction for mechanically ventilated patients as well as those diagnosed with pneumonia and COVID-19.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceCOVID-19Machine learningMortality predictionSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33042536
PMCPMC7532803

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.