Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35796212›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Development and Validation of a Personalized Model With Transfer Learning for Acute Kidney Injury Risk Estimation Using Electronic Health Records.

Kang Liu, Xiangzhou Zhang, Weiqi Chen, Alan S L Yu, John A Kellum, Michael E Matheny, Steven Q Simpson, Yong Hu, Mei Liu

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 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 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. A Comparative Analysis of Patient Similarity Measures for Outcome Prediction.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. 2023 Beijing Health Data Science Summit.Health data science · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Kang LiuBig Data Decision Institute, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xiangzhou ZhangBig Data Decision Institute, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Weiqi ChenBig Data Decision Institute, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Alan S L YuDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension and the Jared Grantham Kidney Institute, School of Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City.
John A KellumCenter for Critical Care Nephrology, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Michael E MathenyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee.
Steven Q SimpsonDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City.
Yong HuBig Data Decision Institute, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Mei LiuDivision of Medical Informatics, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City.
Jinan University · CNUniversity of Kansas Medical Center · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · USVA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System · US

Funding

RADx-UP: Improving the Response of Local Urban and Rural Communities to Disparities in Covid-19 TestingUL1TR002366 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI Mario Castro, JAMES STEVEN LEEDER · 2017 to 2026
$44.3M
Using Integrated Omics to Identify Dysfunctional Genetic Mechanisms Influencing Schizophrenia and Sleep DisturbancesP20GM130423 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI Kalyani Pyaram, Steven Allan Soper · 2019 to 2026
$21.5M
Identifying Personalized Risk of Acute Kidney Injury with Machine LearningR01DK116986 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI LIU, MEI · 2019 to 2021
$1.5M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002366NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK116986NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM130423
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a heterogeneous syndrome prevalent among hospitalized patients. Personalized risk estimation and risk factor identification may allow effective intervention and improved outcomes. Objective: To develop and validate personalized AKI risk estimation models using electronic health records (EHRs), examine whether personalized models were beneficial in comparison with global and subgroup models, and assess the heterogeneity of risk factors and their outcomes in different subpopulations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study analyzed EHR data from 1 tertiary care hospital and used machine learning and logistic regression to develop and validate global, subgroup, and personalized risk estimation models. Transfer learning was implemented to enhance the personalized model. Predictor outcomes across subpopulations were analyzed, and metaregression was used to explore predictor interactions. Adults who were hospitalized for 2 or more days from November 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016, were included in the analysis. Patients with moderate or severe kidney dysfunction at admission were excluded. Data were analyzed between August 28, 2019, and May 8, 2022. Exposures: Clinical and laboratory variables in the EHR. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was AKI of any severity, and AKI was defined using the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes serum creatinine criteria. Performance of the models was measured with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision-recall curve, and calibration. Results: The study cohort comprised 76 957 inpatient encounters. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 55.5 (17.4) years and included 42 159 men (54.8%). The personalized model with transfer learning outperformed the global model for AKI estimation in terms of AUROC among general inpatients (0.78 [95% CI, 0.77-0.79] vs 0.76 [95% CI, 0.75-0.76]; P < .001) and across the high-risk subgroups (0.79 [95% CI, 0.78-0.80] vs 0.75 [95% CI, 0.74-0.77]; P < .001) and low-risk subgroups (0.74 [95% CI, 0.73-0.75] vs 0.71 [95% CI, 0.70-0.72]; P < .001). The AUROC improvement reached 0.13 for the high-risk subgroups, such as those undergoing liver transplant and cardiac surgery. Moreover, the personalized model with transfer learning performed better than or comparably with the best published models in well-studied AKI subgroups. Predictor outcomes varied significantly between patients, and interaction analysis uncovered modifiers of the predictor outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study demonstrated that a personalized modeling with transfer learning is an improved AKI risk estimation approach that can be used across diverse patient subgroups. Risk factor heterogeneity and interactions at the individual level highlighted the need for agile, personalized care.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryElectronic Health RecordsAdultArea Under CurveCreatinineHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedCreatinine

Identifiers

PMID35796212
PMCPMC9250052
OpenAlexW4283765457

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.