Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37046259›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2023

Impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the performance of machine learning algorithms for predicting perioperative mortality.

D I Andonov, B Ulm, M Graessner, A Podtschaske, M Blobner, B Jungwirth, S M Kagerbauer

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04092933 (Machine-learning Model for Perioperative Risk Calculation), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

NCT04092933 unknown statusnot on this map

Machine-learning Model for Perioperative Risk Calculation

TypeobservationalSponsorTechnical University of MunichRan2014 to 2024Enrolled175,559ConditionsPerioperative/Postoperative Complications
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

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

7 authors.

D I AndonovDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
B UlmDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
M GraessnerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, School of Medicine, University Hospital Ulm, University of Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, Ulm, 89081, Germany.
A PodtschaskeDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
M BlobnerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
B JungwirthDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, School of Medicine, University Hospital Ulm, University of Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, Ulm, 89081, Germany.
S M KagerbauerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. simone.kagerbauer@uni-ulm.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine-learning models are susceptible to external influences which can result in performance deterioration. The aim of our study was to elucidate the impact of a sudden shift in covariates, like the one caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, on model performance.

methodsAfter ethical approval and registration in Clinical Trials (NCT04092933, initial release 17/09/2019), we developed different models for the prediction of perioperative mortality based on preoperative data: one for the pre-pandemic data period until March 2020, one including data before the pandemic and from the first wave until May 2020, and one that covers the complete period before and during the pandemic until October 2021. We applied XGBoost as well as a Deep Learning neural network (DL). Performance metrics of each model during the different pandemic phases were determined, and XGBoost models were analysed for changes in feature importance.

resultsXGBoost and DL provided similar performance on the pre-pandemic data with respect to area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC, 0.951 vs. 0.942) and area under precision-recall curve (AUPR, 0.144 vs. 0.187). Validation in patient cohorts of the different pandemic waves showed high fluctuations in performance from both AUROC and AUPR for DL, whereas the XGBoost models seemed more stable. Change in variable frequencies with onset of the pandemic were visible in age, ASA score, and the higher proportion of emergency operations, among others. Age consistently showed the highest information gain. Models based on pre-pandemic data performed worse during the first pandemic wave (AUROC 0.914 for XGBoost and DL) whereas models augmented with data from the first wave lacked performance after the first wave (AUROC 0.907 for XGBoost and 0.747 for DL). The deterioration was also visible in AUPR, which worsened by over 50% in both XGBoost and DL in the first phase after re-training.

conclusionsA sudden shift in data impacts model performance. Re-training the model with updated data may cause degradation in predictive accuracy if the changes are only transient. Too early re-training should therefore be avoided, and close model surveillance is necessary.

Indexed as

COVID-19AlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerPandemicsCovariate shiftCovid-19Machine learningModel degradation

Identifiers

PMID37046259
PMCPMC10092913

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.