Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37415234›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2023

Development and validation of the creatinine clearance predictor machine learning models in critically ill adults.

Chao-Yuan Huang, Fabian Güiza, Pieter Wouters, Liese Mebis, Giorgia Carra, Jan Gunst, Philippe Meersseman, Michael Casaer, Greet Van den Berghe, Greet De Vlieger and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Temporal Recurrent Neural Networks for Predicting Acute Kidney Injury Recovery by Time of Discharge.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Computational approaches for toxicology and Pharmacokinetic properties prediction.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chao-Yuan HuangLaboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Fabian GüizaDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Pieter WoutersDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Liese MebisDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Giorgia CarraLaboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan GunstLaboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Philippe MeerssemanDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Medical Intensive Care Unit, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Michael CasaerLaboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Greet Van den BergheLaboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Greet De VliegerLaboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Geert MeyfroidtLaboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. geert.meyfroidt@uzleuven.be.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn critically ill patients, measured creatinine clearance (CrCl) is the most reliable method to evaluate glomerular filtration rate in routine clinical practice and may vary subsequently on a day-to-day basis. We developed and externally validated models to predict CrCl one day ahead and compared them with a reference reflecting current clinical practice.

methodsA gradient boosting method (GBM) machine-learning algorithm was used to develop the models on data from 2825 patients from the EPaNIC multicenter randomized controlled trial database. We externally validated the models on 9576 patients from the University Hospitals Leuven, included in the M@tric database. Three models were developed: a "Core" model based on demographic, admission diagnosis, and daily laboratory results; a "Core + BGA" model adding blood gas analysis results; and a "Core + BGA + Monitoring" model also including high-resolution monitoring data. Model performance was evaluated against the actual CrCl by mean absolute error (MAE) and root-mean-square error (RMSE).

resultsAll three developed models showed smaller prediction errors than the reference. Assuming the same CrCl of the day of prediction showed 20.6 (95% CI 20.3-20.9) ml/min MAE and 40.1 (95% CI 37.9-42.3) ml/min RMSE in the external validation cohort, while the developed model having the smallest RMSE (the Core + BGA + Monitoring model) had 18.1 (95% CI 17.9-18.3) ml/min MAE and 28.9 (95% CI 28-29.7) ml/min RMSE.

conclusionsPrediction models based on routinely collected clinical data in the ICU were able to accurately predict next-day CrCl. These models could be useful for hydrophilic drug dosage adjustment or stratification of patients at risk.

trial registrationNot applicable.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsCritical IllnessAdultCreatinineGlomerular Filtration RateHumansCreatinineCreatinine clearanceExternal validationIntensive care unitMachine learningPrediction model

Identifiers

PMID37415234
PMCPMC10327364
OpenAlexW4383313799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.