ArticlePloS one2020
Using the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) and machine learning to predict trauma patient mortality at admission.
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Identification of predictive factors and development of a prediction model for rehabilitation facility discharge in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury: a retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.Journal of trauma and injury · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based prediction of mortality in pediatric trauma patients.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Development of clinical decision support for patients older than 65 years with fall-related TBI using artificial intelligence modeling.PloS one · 2025Article
- Identifying Age-Specific Risk Factors for Poor Outcomes After Trauma With Machine Learning.The Journal of surgical research · 2024Article
- Value of trauma registries in improving global trauma outcomes.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2024Article
- An Artificial Intelligence Model for Predicting Trauma Mortality Among Emergency Department Patients in South Korea: Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Science fiction or clinical reality: a review of the applications of artificial intelligence along the continuum of trauma care.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Review
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning for hemorrhagic trauma care.Military Medical Research · 2023Review
- An efficient edge/cloud medical system for rapid detection of level of consciousness in emergency medicine based on explainable machine learning models.Neural computing & applications · 2023Article
- Decision support by machine learning systems for acute management of severely injured patients: A systematic review.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Predicting risk for trauma patients using static and dynamic information from the MIMIC III database.PloS one · 2022Article
- Data Science Trends Relevant to Nursing Practice: A Rapid Review of the 2020 Literature.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A 400-estimator gradient boosting classifier was trained to predict survival probabilities of trauma patients. The National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) provided 799233 complete patient records (778303 survivors and 20930 deaths) each containing 32 features, a number further reduced to only 8 features via the permutation importance method. Importantly, the 8 features can all be readily determined at admission: systolic blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, temperature, oxygen saturation, gender, age and Glasgow coma score. Since death was rare, a rebalanced training set was used to train the model. The model is able to predict a survival probability for any trauma patient and accurately distinguish between a deceased and survived patient in 92.4% of all cases. Partial dependence curves (Psurvival vs. feature value) obtained from the trained model revealed the global importance of Glasgow coma score, age, and systolic blood pressure while pulse rate, respiratory rate, temperature, oxygen saturation, and gender had more subtle single variable influences. Shapley values, which measure the relative contribution of each of the 8 features to individual patient risk, were computed for several patients and were able to quantify patient-specific warning signs. Using the NTDB to sample across numerous patient traumas and hospital protocols, the trained model and Shapley values rapidly provides quantitative insight into which combination of variables in an 8-dimensional space contributed most to each trauma patient's predicted global risk of death upon emergency room admission.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.