Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35592400›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Machine Learning Methods for Predicting Long-Term Mortality in Patients After Cardiac Surgery.

Yue Yu, Chi Peng, Zhiyuan Zhang, Kejia Shen, Yufeng Zhang, Jian Xiao, Wang Xi, Pei Wang, Jin Rao, Zhichao Jin and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Predicting the unpredictable in cardiothoracic surgery.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yue YuDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Chi PengDepartment of Health Statistics, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Zhiyuan ZhangDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, No. 988 Hospital of Joint Logistic Support Force of PLA, Zhengzhou, China.
Kejia ShenDepartment of Personnel Administration, Second Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Yufeng ZhangDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Jian XiaoDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Wang XiDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Pei WangDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Jin RaoDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Zhichao JinDepartment of Health Statistics, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Zhinong WangDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Changzheng Hospital · CNSecond Military Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to construct and validate several machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict long-term mortality and identify risk factors in unselected patients post-cardiac surgery. Methods: The Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-III) database was used to perform a retrospective administrative database study. Candidate predictors consisted of the demographics, comorbidity, vital signs, laboratory test results, scoring systems, and treatment information on the first day of ICU admission. Four-year mortality was set as the study outcome. We used the ML methods of logistic regression (LR), artificial neural network (NNET), naïve bayes (NB), gradient boosting machine (GBM), adapting boosting (Ada), random forest (RF), bagged trees (BT), and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB). The prognostic capacity and clinical utility of these ML models were compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: Of 7,368 patients in MIMIC-III included in the final cohort, a total of 1,337 (18.15%) patients died during a 4-year follow-up. Among 65 variables extracted from the database, a total of 25 predictors were selected using recursive feature elimination and included in the subsequent analysis. The Ada model performed best among eight models in both discriminatory ability with the highest AUC of 0.801 and goodness of fit (visualized by calibration curve). Moreover, the DCA shows that the net benefit of the RF, Ada, and BT models surpassed that of other ML models for almost all threshold probability values. Additionally, through the Ada technique, we determined that red blood cell distribution width (RDW), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), SAPS II, anion gap (AG), age, urine output, chloride, creatinine, congestive heart failure, and SOFA were the Top 10 predictors in the feature importance rankings. Conclusions: The Ada model performs best in predicting 4-year mortality after cardiac surgery among the eight ML models, which might have significant application in the development of early warning systems for patients following operations.

Indexed as

cardiac surgeryintensive care unitlong-term mortalitymachine learningMIMIC-III databaseprediction model

Identifiers

PMID35592400
PMCPMC9110683
OpenAlexW4225416424

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.