Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34946388›Full record

ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Does Artificial Intelligence Make Clinical Decision Better? A Review of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Acute Kidney Injury Prediction.

Tao Han Lee, Jia-Jin Chen, Chi-Tung Cheng, Chih-Hsiang Chang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Tao Han LeeKidney Research Center, Department of Nephrology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, Taoyuan 33305, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-3650-7236
Jia-Jin ChenKidney Research Center, Department of Nephrology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, Taoyuan 33305, Taiwan.
Chi-Tung ChengDepartment of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 33305, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-2697-4642
Chih-Hsiang ChangKidney Research Center, Department of Nephrology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, Taoyuan 33305, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-7342-335X

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), Taiwan MOST 110-2314-B-182A-043
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of hospitalization that greatly and negatively affects the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients. Current guidelines use serum creatinine level and urine output rate for defining AKI and as the staging criteria of AKI. However, because they are not sensitive or specific markers of AKI, clinicians find it difficult to predict the occurrence of AKI and prescribe timely treatment. Advances in computing technology have led to the recent use of machine learning and artificial intelligence in AKI prediction, recent research reported that by using electronic health records (EHR) the AKI prediction via machine-learning models can reach AUROC over 0.80, in some studies even reach 0.93. Our review begins with the background and history of the definition of AKI, and the evolution of AKI risk factors and prediction models is also appraised. Then, we summarize the current evidence regarding the application of e-alert systems and machine-learning models in AKI prediction.

Indexed as

acute kidney injuryartificial intelligencemachine learningprediction model

Identifiers

PMID34946388
PMCPMC8701097

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.