Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35902633›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Prediction algorithm for ICU mortality and length of stay using machine learning.

Shinya Iwase, Taka-Aki Nakada, Tadanaga Shimada, Takehiko Oami, Takashi Shimazui, Nozomi Takahashi, Jun Yamabe, Yasuo Yamao, Eiryo Kawakami

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Machine Learning for Intensive Care Unit Length-of-Stay Prediction: A Simulation-Based Approach to Bed Capacity Management.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Shinya IwaseDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan.
Taka-Aki NakadaDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan. taka.nakada@nifty.com.
Tadanaga ShimadaDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan.
Takehiko OamiDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan.
Takashi ShimazuiDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan.
Nozomi TakahashiDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan.
Jun YamabeSmart 119 Inc., 7th floor, Chiba Chuo Twin Building No. 2, 2-5-1 Chuo, Chiba, Japan.
Yasuo YamaoDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan.
Eiryo KawakamiDepartment of Artificial Intelligence Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning can predict outcomes and determine variables contributing to precise prediction, and can thus classify patients with different risk factors of outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the predictive accuracy for mortality and length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU) patients using machine learning, and to identify the variables contributing to the precise prediction or classification of patients. Patients (n = 12,747) admitted to the ICU at Chiba University Hospital were randomly assigned to the training and test cohorts. After learning using the variables on admission in the training cohort, the area under the curve (AUC) was analyzed in the test cohort to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the supervised machine learning classifiers, including random forest (RF) for outcomes (primary outcome, mortality; secondary outcome, length of ICU stay). The rank of the variables that contributed to the machine learning prediction was confirmed, and cluster analysis of the patients with risk factors of mortality was performed to identify the important variables associated with patient outcomes. Machine learning using RF revealed a high predictive value for mortality, with an AUC of 0.945 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.922-0.977). In addition, RF showed high predictive value for short and long ICU stays, with AUCs of 0.881 (95% CI 0.876-0.908) and 0.889 (95% CI 0.849-0.936), respectively. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was identified as a variable contributing to the precise prediction in machine learning for both mortality and length of ICU stay. LDH was also identified as a contributing variable to classify patients into sub-populations based on different risk factors of mortality. The machine learning algorithm could predict mortality and length of stay in ICU patients with high accuracy. LDH was identified as a contributing variable in mortality and length of ICU stay prediction and could be used to classify patients based on mortality risk.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsIntensive Care UnitsMachine LearningMortalityArea Under CurveHumansLength of StayRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID35902633
PMCPMC9334583

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.