ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2022
Combining adult with pediatric patient data to develop a clinical decision support tool intended for children: leveraging machine learning to model heterogeneity.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinically-applicable prediction of hospital stay and patient similarity retrieval in paediatric cardiology using machine learning.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Cross-assay RNA modeling reveals cancer biomarkers.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Enhancing Clinical Decision Support in Nephrology: Addressing Algorithmic Bias Through Artificial Intelligence Governance.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2024Review
- Self-supervised machine learning using adult inpatient data produces effective models for pediatric clinical prediction tasks.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- Correction to: Combining adult with pediatric patient data to develop a clinical decision support tool intended for children: leveraging machine learning to model heterogeneity.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical decision support (CDS) tools built using adult data do not typically perform well for children. We explored how best to leverage adult data to improve the performance of such tools. This study assesses whether it is better to build CDS tools for children using data from children alone or to use combined data from both adults and children.
methodsRetrospective cohort using data from 2017 to 2020. Participants include all individuals (adults and children) receiving an elective surgery at a large academic medical center that provides adult and pediatric services. We predicted need for mechanical ventilation or admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Predictor variables included demographic, clinical, and service utilization factors known prior to surgery. We compared predictive models built using machine learning to regression-based methods that used a pediatric or combined adult-pediatric cohort. We compared model performance based on Area Under the Receiver Operator Characteristic.
resultsWhile we found that adults and children have different risk factors, machine learning methods are able to appropriately model the underlying heterogeneity of each population and produce equally accurate predictive models whether using data only from pediatric patients or combined data from both children and adults. Results from regression-based methods were improved by the use of pediatric-specific data.
conclusionsCDS tools for children can successfully use combined data from adults and children if the model accounts for underlying heterogeneity, as in machine learning models.
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.