Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33539390›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Predicting mortality of patients with acute kidney injury in the ICU using XGBoost model.

Jialin Liu, Jinfa Wu, Siru Liu, Mengdie Li, Kunchang Hu, Ke Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 131 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Advanced Machine Learning Models for Predicting Post-Thrombolysis Hemorrhagic Transformation in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jialin LiuInformation Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1369-4625
Jinfa WuSchool of Life Science & Technology, University of Electronic Science & Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Siru LiuDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
Mengdie LiSchool of Life Science & Technology, University of Electronic Science & Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Kunchang HuSchool of Life Science & Technology, University of Electronic Science & Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Ke LiSchool of Life Science & Technology, University of Electronic Science & Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNSichuan University · CNUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe goal of this study is to construct a mortality prediction model using the XGBoot (eXtreme Gradient Boosting) decision tree model for AKI (acute kidney injury) patients in the ICU (intensive care unit), and to compare its performance with that of three other machine learning models.

methodsWe used the eICU Collaborative Research Database (eICU-CRD) for model development and performance comparison. The prediction performance of the XGBoot model was compared with the other three machine learning models. These models included LR (logistic regression), SVM (support vector machines), and RF (random forest). In the model comparison, the AUROC (area under receiver operating curve), accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score were used to evaluate the predictive performance of each model.

resultsA total of 7548 AKI patients were analyzed in this study. The overall in-hospital mortality of AKI patients was 16.35%. The best performing algorithm in this study was XGBoost with the highest AUROC (0.796, p < 0.01), F1(0.922, p < 0.01) and accuracy (0.860). The precision (0.860) and recall (0.994) of the XGBoost model rank second among the four models.

conclusionXGBoot model had obvious advantages of performance compared to the other machine learning models. This will be helpful for risk identification and early intervention for AKI patients at risk of death.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsCritical CareDatabases, FactualData ManagementFemaleForecastingHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsLogistic ModelsMachine LearningMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID33539390
PMCPMC7861386
OpenAlexW3128201067

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.