ArticleBMC anesthesiology2022
Explainable machine learning approach to predict extubation in critically ill ventilated patients: a retrospective study in central Taiwan.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in mechanical ventilation: a narrative review of clinical applications and research gaps.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- A temporal deep learning algorithm for prediction of extubation failures in critical care patients.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Article
- Machine learning in ARDS: an intensivist's guide to artificial intelligence applications.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-driven anticancer peptide discovery.iMetaOmics · 2025Review
- Role of artificial intelligence in enhancing mechanical ventilation - A peek into the future.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Using ML techniques to predict extubation outcomes for patients with central nervous system injuries in the Yun-Gui Plateau.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Patients with Respiratory Failure Requiring Mechanical Ventilation: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Application of Machine Learning in Predicting Perioperative Outcomes in Patients with Cancer: A Narrative Review for Clinicians.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
- Using Artificial Intelligence to Predict Mechanical Ventilation Weaning Success in Patients with Respiratory Failure, Including Those with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Transparency and precision in the age of AI: evaluation of explainability-enhanced recommendation systems.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Article
- Predicting Do-Not-Resuscitate Decisions in Critically Ill Patients Through Using Multitask Learning: A Retrospective Study of the MIMIC-IV Database.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWeaning from mechanical ventilation (MV) is an essential issue in critically ill patients, and we used an explainable machine learning (ML) approach to establish an extubation prediction model.
methodsWe enrolled patients who were admitted to intensive care units during 2015-2019 at Taichung Veterans General Hospital, a referral hospital in central Taiwan. We used five ML models, including extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), categorical boosting (CatBoost), light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), random forest (RF) and logistic regression (LR), to establish the extubation prediction model, and the feature window as well as prediction window was 48 h and 24 h, respectively. We further employed feature importance, Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) plot, partial dependence plot (PDP) and local interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME) for interpretation of the model at the domain, feature, and individual levels.
resultsWe enrolled 5,940 patients and found the accuracy was comparable among XGBoost, LightGBM, CatBoost and RF, with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve using XGBoost to predict extubation was 0.921. The calibration and decision curve analysis showed well applicability of models. We also used the SHAP summary plot and PDP plot to demonstrate discriminative points of six key features in predicting extubation. Moreover, we employed LIME and SHAP force plots to show predicted probabilities of extubation and the rationale of the prediction at the individual level.
conclusionsWe developed an extubation prediction model with high accuracy and visualised explanations aligned with clinical workflow, and the model may serve as an autonomous screen tool for timely weaning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.