ArticleBMC anesthesiology2022
Learning to predict in-hospital mortality risk in the intensive care unit with attention-based temporal convolution network.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Value of AI in Critical Care Using Real-World Evidence on Intensive Care Unit Mortality Prediction: Cost-Utility Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Time-Series modeling for predicting mortality risk in intensive care unit patients with pulmonary inflammation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Smart emergency care: a narrative review of predictive machine learning models.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Opioid misuse detection from cognitive and physiological data with temporal fusion deep learning.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2025Article
- Comparison of time-series models for predicting physiological metrics under sedation.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based scoring model for predicting mortality in ICU-admitted ischemic stroke patients with moderate to severe consciousness disorders.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Early recognition of risk of critical adverse events based on deep neural decision gradient boosting.Frontiers in public health · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDynamic prediction of patient mortality risk in the ICU with time series data is limited due to high dimensionality, uncertainty in sampling intervals, and other issues. A new deep learning method, temporal convolution network (TCN), makes it possible to deal with complex clinical time series data in ICU. We aimed to develop and validate it to predict mortality risk using time series data from MIMIC III dataset.
methodsA total of 21,139 records of ICU stays were analysed and 17 physiological variables from the MIMIC III dataset were used to predict mortality risk. Then we compared the model performance of the attention-based TCN with that of traditional artificial intelligence (AI) methods.
resultsThe area under receiver operating characteristic (AUCROC) and area under precision-recall curve (AUC-PR) of attention-based TCN for predicting the mortality risk 48 h after ICU admission were 0.837 (0.824 -0.850) and 0.454, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of attention-based TCN were 67.1% and 82.6%, respectively, compared to the traditional AI method, which had a low sensitivity (< 50%).
conclusionsThe attention-based TCN model achieved better performance in the prediction of mortality risk with time series data than traditional AI methods and conventional score-based models. The attention-based TCN mortality risk model has the potential for helping decision-making for critical patients.
trial registrationData used for the prediction of mortality risk were extracted from the freely accessible MIMIC III dataset. The project was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Boston, MA) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA). Requirement for individual patient consent was waived because the project did not impact clinical care and all protected health information was deidentified. The data were accessed via a data use agreement between PhysioNet, a National Institutes of Health-supported data repository (https://www.physionet.org/), and one of us (Yu-wen Chen, Certification Number: 28341490). All methods were carried out in accordance with the institutional guidelines and regulations.
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.