ArticleHealth science reports2023
Predicting the COVID-19 mortality among Iranian patients using tree-based models: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Health science reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning approaches to predict the need for intensive care unit admission among Iranian COVID-19 patients based on ICD-10: A cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Predicting the COVID-19 mortality among Iranian patients using tree-based models: A cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: To explore the use of different machine learning models in prediction of COVID-19 mortality in hospitalized patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 44,112 patients from six academic hospitals who were admitted for COVID-19 between March 2020 and August 2021 were included in this study. Variables were obtained from their electronic medical records. Random forest-recursive feature elimination was used to select key features. Decision tree, random forest, LightGBM, and XGBoost model were developed. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, F-1 score, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-AUC were used to compare the prediction performance of different models. Results: Random forest-recursive feature elimination selected following features to include in the prediction model: Age, sex, hypertension, malignancy, pneumonia, cardiac problem, cough, dyspnea, and respiratory system disease. XGBoost and LightGBM showed the best performance with an ROC-AUC of 0.83 [0.822-0.842] and 0.83 [0.816-0.837] and sensitivity of 0.77. Conclusion: XGBoost, LightGBM, and random forest have a relatively high predictive performance in prediction of mortality in COVID-19 patients and can be applied in hospital settings, however, future research are needed to externally confirm the validation of these models.
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.