Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35657648›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2022

Predicting Abnormal Laboratory Blood Test Results in the Intensive Care Unit Using Novel Features Based on Information Theory and Historical Conditional Probability: Observational Study.

Camilo E Valderrama, Daniel J Niven, Henry T Stelfox, Joon Lee

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Camilo E ValderramaData Intelligence for Health Lab, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5333-8265
Daniel J NivenDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9527-0577
Henry T StelfoxO'Brien Institute for Public Health, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1231-1490
Joon LeeData Intelligence for Health Lab, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8593-9321
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRedundancy in laboratory blood tests is common in intensive care units (ICUs), affecting patients' health and increasing health care expenses. Medical communities have made recommendations to order laboratory tests more judiciously. Wise selection can rely on modern data-driven approaches that have been shown to help identify low-yield laboratory blood tests in ICUs. However, although conditional entropy and conditional probability distribution have shown the potential to measure the uncertainty of yielding an abnormal test, no previous studies have adapted these techniques to include them in machine learning models for predicting abnormal laboratory test results.

objectiveThis study aimed to address the limitations of previous reports by adapting conditional entropy and conditional probability to extract features for predicting abnormal laboratory blood test results.

methodsWe used an ICU data set collected across Alberta, Canada, which included 55,689 ICU admissions from 48,672 patients. We investigated the features of conditional entropy and conditional probability by comparing the performances of 2 machine learning approaches for predicting normal and abnormal results for 18 blood laboratory tests. Approach 1 used patients' vitals, age, sex, and admission diagnosis as features. Approach 2 used the same features plus the new conditional entropy-based and conditional probability-based features. Both approaches used 4 different machine learning models (fuzzy model, logistic regression, random forest, and gradient boosting trees) and 10 metrics (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision, negative predictive value [NPV], F

resultsApproach 1 achieved an average AUC of 0.86 for all 18 laboratory tests across the 4 models (sensitivity 78%, specificity 84%, precision 82%, NPV 75%, F

conclusionsThe findings suggest that conditional entropy-based features and pretest probability improve the capacity to discriminate between normal and abnormal laboratory test results. Detecting the next laboratory test result is an intermediate step toward developing guidelines for reducing overtesting in the ICU.

Indexed as

blood laboratory test redundancyelectronic medical recordsfuzzy modelingintensive care unitmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID35657648
PMCPMC9206206
OpenAlexW4226156328

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.