Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34951865›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

The Development and Validation of Simplified Machine Learning Algorithms to Predict Prognosis of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: Multicenter, Retrospective Study.

Fang He, John H Page, Kerry R Weinberg, Anirban Mishra

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors.

Fang HeAmgen Inc, Center for Observational Research, South San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4185-9079
John H PageAmgen Inc, Center for Observational Research, Thousand Oaks, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5299-4524
Kerry R WeinbergAmgen Inc, Digital Health & Innovation, Thousand Oaks, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2375-066X
Anirban MishraAmgen Inc, Digital Health & Innovation, Thousand Oaks, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9897-8602

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented; under resource-constrained settings, predictive algorithms can help to stratify disease severity, alerting physicians of high-risk patients; however, there are only few risk scores derived from a substantially large electronic health record (EHR) data set, using simplified predictors as input.

objectiveThe objectives of this study were to develop and validate simplified machine learning algorithms that predict COVID-19 adverse outcomes; to evaluate the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and calibration of the algorithms; and to derive clinically meaningful thresholds.

methodsWe performed machine learning model development and validation via a cohort study using multicenter, patient-level, longitudinal EHRs from the Optum COVID-19 database that provides anonymized, longitudinal EHR from across the United States. The models were developed based on clinical characteristics to predict 28-day in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, respiratory failure, and mechanical ventilator usages at inpatient setting. Data from patients who were admitted from February 1, 2020, to September 7, 2020, were randomly sampled into development, validation, and test data sets; data collected from September 7, 2020, to November 15, 2020, were reserved as the postdevelopment prospective test data set.

resultsOf the 3.7 million patients in the analysis, 585,867 patients were diagnosed or tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 50,703 adult patients were hospitalized with COVID-19 between February 1 and November 15, 2020. Among the study cohort (n=50,703), there were 6204 deaths, 9564 ICU admissions, 6478 mechanically ventilated or EMCO patients, and 25,169 patients developed acute respiratory distress syndrome or respiratory failure within 28 days since hospital admission. The algorithms demonstrated high accuracy (AUC 0.89, 95% CI 0.89-0.89 on the test data set [n=10,752]), consistent prediction through the second wave of the pandemic from September to November (AUC 0.85, 95% CI 0.85-0.86) on the postdevelopment prospective test data set [n=14,863], great clinical relevance, and utility. Besides, a comprehensive set of 386 input covariates from baseline or at admission were included in the analysis; the end-to-end pipeline automates feature selection and model development. The parsimonious model with only 10 input predictors produced comparably accurate predictions; these 10 predictors (age, blood urea nitrogen, SpO

conclusionsThe systematic approach and rigorous validation demonstrate consistent model performance to predict even beyond the period of data collection, with satisfactory discriminatory power and great clinical utility. Overall, the study offers an accurate, validated, and reliable prediction model based on only 10 clinical features as a prognostic tool to stratifying patients with COVID-19 into intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk groups. This simple predictive tool is shared with a wider health care community, to enable service as an early warning system to alert physicians of possible high-risk patients, or as a resource triaging tool to optimize health care resources.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultAlgorithmsCohort StudiesHumansMachine LearningPandemicsPrognosisProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2COVID-19machine learningpredictive algorithmprognostic model

Identifiers

PMID34951865
PMCPMC8785956

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.