Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33860407›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2022

Machine learning applied to a Cardiac Surgery Recovery Unit and to a Coronary Care Unit for mortality prediction.

Beatriz Nistal-Nuño

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Beatriz Nistal-NuñoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Pontevedra, Mourente s/n, 36071, Pontevedra, Spain. nistalnunobeatriz7@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2210-0726

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most established severity-of-illness systems used for prediction of intensive care unit (ICU) mortality were developed targeted at the general ICU population, based on logistic regression (LR). To date, no dynamic predictive tool for ICU mortality has been developed targeted at the Cardiac Surgery Recovery Unit (CSRU) and Coronary Care Unit (CCU) using machine learning (ML). CSRU and CCU adult patients from the MIMIC-III critical care database were studied. The ML methods developed extract ICU data during a 5-h window and demographic features to produce mortality predictions and were compared to six established severity-of-illness systems and LR. In a secondary experiment, additional procedure/surgery and ICU features were added to the models. The ML models developed were the Tree Ensemble (TE), Random Forest, XGBoost Tree Ensemble (XGB), Naive Bayes (NB), and Bayesian network. The discrimination, calibration and accuracy statistics were assessed. The AUROC values were superior for the ML models reaching 0.926 and 0.924 for the XGB, and 0.904 and 0.908 for the TE for ICU mortality prediction in the primary and secondary experiments respectively. Among the conventional systems, the serial SOFA obtained the highest AUROC (0.8405). The Brier score was better for the ML models except the NB over the conventional systems. The accuracy statistics less sensitive to unbalanced cohorts were higher for all the ML models. In conclusion, the predictive power of XGB was excellent, substantially outperforming the conventional systems and LR. The ML models developed in this work offer promising results that could benefit CSRU and CCU.

Indexed as

Cardiac Surgical ProceduresCoronary Care UnitsAdultBayes TheoremHumansIntensive Care UnitsMachine LearningCardiac Surgery Recovery UnitCoronary Care UnitDecision-support systemsMachine learningMortality

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.