ArticleRenal failure2023
Explainable machine learning model for predicting furosemide responsiveness in patients with oliguric acute kidney injury.
Article in Renal failure, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Codes in AI Prediction Models and Label Leakage of Same-Admission Clinical Outcomes.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Article
- Explainable Boosting Machine approach identifies risk factors for acute renal failure.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2024Article
- A risk prediction model for efficient intubation in the emergency department: A 4-year single-center retrospective analysis.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024Article
- Detection of potential drug-drug interactions for risk of acute kidney injury: a population-based case-control study using interpretable machine-learning models.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough current guidelines didn't support the routine use of furosemide in oliguric acute kidney injury (AKI) management, some patients may benefit from furosemide administration at an early stage. We aimed to develop an explainable machine learning (ML) model to differentiate between furosemide-responsive (FR) and furosemide-unresponsive (FU) oliguric AKI.
methodsFrom Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-IV (MIMIC-IV) and eICU Collaborative Research Database (eICU-CRD), oliguric AKI patients with urine output (UO) < 0.5 ml/kg/h for the first 6 h after ICU admission and furosemide infusion ≥ 40 mg in the following 6 h were retrospectively selected. The MIMIC-IV cohort was used in training a XGBoost model to predict UO > 0.65 ml/kg/h during 6-24 h succeeding the initial 6 h for assessing oliguria, and it was validated in the eICU-CRD cohort. We compared the predictive performance of the XGBoost model with the traditional logistic regression and other ML models.
results6897 patients were included in the MIMIC-IV training cohort, with 2235 patients in the eICU-CRD validation cohort. The XGBoost model showed an AUC of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96-0.98) for differentiating FR and FU oliguric AKI. It outperformed the logistic regression and other ML models in correctly predicting furosemide diuretic response, achieved 92.43% sensitivity (95% CI: 90.88-93.73%) and 95.12% specificity (95% CI: 93.51-96.3%).
conclusionA boosted ensemble algorithm can be used to accurately differentiate between patients who would and would not respond to furosemide in oliguric AKI. By making the model explainable, clinicians would be able to better understand the reasoning behind the prediction outcome and make individualized treatment.
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.