ArticlePloS one2022
Predicting risk for trauma patients using static and dynamic information from the MIMIC III database.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Codes in AI Prediction Models and Label Leakage of Same-Admission Clinical Outcomes.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- A Hybrid Bidirectional Deep Learning Model Using HRV for Prediction of ICU Mortality Risk in TBI Patients.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2025Article
- Imputation Strategies Under Clinical Presence: Impact on Algorithmic Fairness.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Risk quantification algorithms in the ICU can provide (1) an early alert to the clinician that a patient is at extreme risk and (2) help manage limited resources efficiently or remotely. With electronic health records, large data sets allow the training of predictive models to quantify patient risk. A gradient boosting classifier was trained to predict high-risk and low-risk trauma patients, where patients were labeled high-risk if they expired within the next 10 hours or within the last 10% of their ICU stay duration. The MIMIC-III database was filtered to extract 5,400 trauma patient records (526 non-survivors) each of which contained 5 static variables (age, gender, etc.) and 28 dynamic variables (e.g., vital signs and metabolic panel). Training data was also extracted from the dynamic variables using a 3-hour moving time window whereby each window was treated as a unique patient-time fragment. We extracted the mean, standard deviation, and skew from each of these 3-hour fragments and included them as inputs for training. Additionally, a survival metric upon admission was calculated for each patient using a previously developed National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB)-trained gradient booster model. The final model was able to distinguish between high-risk and low-risk patients to an AUROC of 92.9%, defined as the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve. Importantly, the dynamic survival probability plots for patients who die appear considerably different from those who survive, an example of reducing the high dimensionality of the patient record to a single trauma trajectory.
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.