Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35591841›Full record

ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2022

An individualized algorithm to predict mortality in COVID-19 pneumonia: a machine learning based study.

Maria Elena Laino, Elena Generali, Tobia Tommasini, Giovanni Angelotti, Alessio Aghemo, Antonio Desai, Pierandrea Morandini, Giulio G Stefanini, Ana Lleo, Antonio Voza and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

11 authors.

Maria Elena LainoHumanitas AI Center, Humanitas Research Hospital IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Elena GeneraliDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Tobia TommasiniHumanitas AI Center, Humanitas Research Hospital IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Giovanni AngelottiHumanitas AI Center, Humanitas Research Hospital IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Alessio AghemoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Antonio DesaiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Pierandrea MorandiniHumanitas AI Center, Humanitas Research Hospital IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Giulio G StefaniniDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Ana LleoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Antonio VozaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Victor SavevskiHumanitas AI Center, Humanitas Research Hospital IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Identifying SARS-CoV-2 patients at higher risk of mortality is crucial in the management of a pandemic. Artificial intelligence techniques allow one to analyze large amounts of data to find hidden patterns. We aimed to develop and validate a mortality score at admission for COVID-19 based on high-level machine learning. Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients between March and December 2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. A machine learning approach based on vital parameters, laboratory values and demographic features was applied to develop different models. Then, a feature importance analysis was performed to reduce the number of variables included in the model, to develop a risk score with good overall performance, that was finally evaluated in terms of discrimination and calibration capabilities. All results underwent cross-validation. Results: 1,135 consecutive patients (median age 70 years, 64% male) were enrolled, 48 patients were excluded, and the cohort was randomly divided into training (760) and test (327) groups. During hospitalization, 251 (22%) patients died. After feature selection, the best performing classifier was random forest (AUC 0.88 ±0.03). Based on the relative importance of each variable, a pragmatic score was developed, showing good performances (AUC 0.85 ±0.025), and three levels were defined that correlated well with in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: Machine learning techniques were applied in order to develop an accurate in-hospital mortality risk score for COVID-19 based on ten variables. The application of the proposed score has utility in clinical settings to guide the management and prognostication of COVID-19 patients.

Indexed as

interleukin-6pneumoniaSARStroponin

Identifiers

PMID35591841
PMCPMC9103632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.