Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36001363›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2022

Predicting Abnormalities in Laboratory Values of Patients in the Intensive Care Unit Using Different Deep Learning Models: Comparative Study.

Ahmad Ayad, Ahmed Hallawa, Arne Peine, Lukas Martin, Lejla Begic Fazlic, Guido Dartmann, Gernot Marx, Anke Schmeink

Abstract 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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Ahmad Ayad *Chair of Information Theory and Data Analytics, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9081-1274
Ahmed HallawaDepartment of Intensive Care and Intermediate Care, University Hospital Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3932-4873
Arne PeineDepartment of Intensive Care and Intermediate Care, University Hospital Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4163-2402
Lukas MartinDepartment of Intensive Care and Intermediate Care, University Hospital Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8650-5090
Lejla Begic FazlicFachbereich Umweltplanung/Umwelttechnik - Fachrichtung Informatik, Trier University of Applied Sciences, Trier, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9869-0219
Guido DartmannFachbereich Umweltplanung/Umwelttechnik - Fachrichtung Informatik, Trier University of Applied Sciences, Trier, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6786-6664
Gernot MarxDepartment of Intensive Care and Intermediate Care, University Hospital Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0866-4234
Anke SchmeinkChair of Information Theory and Data Analytics, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9929-2925

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent years, the volume of medical knowledge and health data has increased rapidly. For example, the increased availability of electronic health records (EHRs) provides accurate, up-to-date, and complete information about patients at the point of care and enables medical staff to have quick access to patient records for more coordinated and efficient care. With this increase in knowledge, the complexity of accurate, evidence-based medicine tends to grow all the time. Health care workers must deal with an increasing amount of data and documentation. Meanwhile, relevant patient data are frequently overshadowed by a layer of less relevant data, causing medical staff to often miss important values or abnormal trends and their importance to the progression of the patient's case.

objectiveThe goal of this work is to analyze the current laboratory results for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) and classify which of these lab values could be abnormal the next time the test is done. Detecting near-future abnormalities can be useful to support clinicians in their decision-making process in the ICU by drawing their attention to the important values and focus on future lab testing, saving them both time and money. Additionally, it will give doctors more time to spend with patients, rather than skimming through a long list of lab values.

methodsWe used Structured Query Language to extract 25 lab values for mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU from the MIMIC-III and eICU data sets. Additionally, we applied time-windowed sampling and holding, and a support vector machine to fill in the missing values in the sparse time series, as well as the Tukey range to detect and delete anomalies. Then, we used the data to train 4 deep learning models for time series classification, as well as a gradient boosting-based algorithm and compared their performance on both data sets.

resultsThe models tested in this work (deep neural networks and gradient boosting), combined with the preprocessing pipeline, achieved an accuracy of at least 80% on the multilabel classification task. Moreover, the model based on the multiple convolutional neural network outperformed the other algorithms on both data sets, with the accuracy exceeding 89%.

conclusionsIn this work, we show that using machine learning and deep neural networks to predict near-future abnormalities in lab values can achieve satisfactory results. Our system was trained, validated, and tested on 2 well-known data sets to ensure that our system bridged the reality gap as much as possible. Finally, the model can be used in combination with our preprocessing pipeline on real-life EHRs to improve patients' diagnosis and treatment.

Indexed as

anomaly detectionCNNDNNEHRICUlab valueslightGBMmachine learningmedical Informaticstime series classification

Identifiers

PMID36001363
PMCPMC9453586

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.