ArticleScientific reports2023
Deep learning for deterioration prediction of COVID-19 patients based on time-series of three vital signs.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A vision-based MobileNet-GRU framework for continuous monitoring of student engagement and emotional states.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Profiling short-term longitudinal severity progression and associated genes in COVID-19 patients using EHR and single-cell analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of Multimodal Deep Learning Approaches for Predicting Clinical Deterioration in Ward Patients: Observational Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Observational
- Comparison of time-series models for predicting physiological metrics under sedation.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unrecognized deterioration of COVID-19 patients can lead to high morbidity and mortality. Most existing deterioration prediction models require a large number of clinical information, typically collected in hospital settings, such as medical images or comprehensive laboratory tests. This is infeasible for telehealth solutions and highlights a gap in deterioration prediction models based on minimal data, which can be recorded at a large scale in any clinic, nursing home, or even at the patient's home. In this study, we develop and compare two prognostic models that predict if a patient will experience deterioration in the forthcoming 3 to 24 h. The models sequentially process routine triadic vital signs: (a) oxygen saturation, (b) heart rate, and (c) temperature. These models are also provided with basic patient information, including sex, age, vaccination status, vaccination date, and status of obesity, hypertension, or diabetes. The difference between the two models is the way that the temporal dynamics of the vital signs are processed. Model #1 utilizes a temporally-dilated version of the Long-Short Term Memory model (LSTM) for temporal processes, and Model #2 utilizes a residual temporal convolutional network (TCN) for this purpose. We train and evaluate the models using data collected from 37,006 COVID-19 patients at NYU Langone Health in New York, USA. The convolution-based model outperforms the LSTM based model, achieving a high AUROC of 0.8844-0.9336 for 3 to 24 h deterioration prediction on a held-out test set. We also conduct occlusion experiments to evaluate the importance of each input feature, which reveals the significance of continuously monitoring the variation of the vital signs. Our results show the prospect for accurate deterioration forecast using a minimum feature set that can be relatively easily obtained using wearable devices and self-reported patient information.
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.