Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37599147›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Digital health2023

Illness severity assessment of older adults in critical illness using machine learning (ELDER-ICU): an international multicentre study with subgroup bias evaluation.

Xiaoli Liu, Pan Hu, Wesley Yeung, Zhongheng Zhang, Vanda Ho, Chao Liu, Clark Dumontier, Patrick J Thoral, Zhi Mao, Desen Cao and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Development and validation of a deep learning radiomics model for predicting adjacent segment degeneration following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.

Xiaoli LiuSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, China; Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China; Laboratory for Computational Physiology, Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Pan HuDepartment of Anesthesiology, The 920 Hospital of Joint Logistic Support Force of Chinese PLA, Kunming Yunnan, China; Department of Critical Care Medicine, The First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Wesley YeungLaboratory for Computational Physiology, Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA; Department of Cardiology, National University Heart Centre, Singapore.
Zhongheng ZhangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine in Diagnosis and Monitoring Research of Zhejiang Province, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Vanda HoDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Chao LiuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Clark DumontierNew England Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA; Division of Aging, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Patrick J ThoralCenter for Critical Care Computational Intelligence, Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Zhi MaoDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Desen CaoDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Roger G MarkLaboratory for Computational Physiology, Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Zhengbo ZhangCenter for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Mengling FengSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health and the Institute of Data Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Deyu LiSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, China; National Key Lab for Virtual Reality Technology and Systems, Beihang University, Beijing, China. Electronic address: deyuli@buaa.edu.cn.
Leo Anthony CeliLaboratory for Computational Physiology, Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA; Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Chinese PLA General Hospital · CNMassachusetts Institute of Technology · USAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLBeihang University · CNBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USNational University Health System · SGNational University Hospital · SGPeople's Liberation Army 401 Hospital · CNSir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CNZhejiang University · CN

Funding

Critical Care Informatics: Ethical considerations around the use and sharing of health-related dataR01EB017205 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI CELI, LEO ANTHONY G, MARK, ROGER GREENWOOD · 2014 to 2021
$3.8M
Integration of Geriatric Measures Alongside Disease-Based Measures to Advance Precision Oncology for Older Veterans with Multiple MyelomaIK2CX002218 · VA · VA BOSTON HEALTH CARE SYSTEM · PI DUMONTIER, CLARK WILLIAM · 2021 to 2024
–
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB017205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComorbidity, frailty, and decreased cognitive function lead to a higher risk of death in elderly patients (more than 65 years of age) during acute medical events. Early and accurate illness severity assessment can support appropriate decision making for clinicians caring for these patients. We aimed to develop ELDER-ICU, a machine learning model to assess the illness severity of older adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with cohort-specific calibration and evaluation for potential model bias.

methodsIn this retrospective, international multicentre study, the ELDER-ICU model was developed using data from 14 US hospitals, and validated in 171 hospitals from the USA and Netherlands. Data were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care database, electronic ICU Collaborative Research Database, and Amsterdam University Medical Centers Database. We used six categories of data as predictors, including demographics and comorbidities, physical frailty, laboratory tests, vital signs, treatments, and urine output. Patient data from the first day of ICU stay were used to predict in-hospital mortality. We used the eXtreme Gradient Boosting algorithm (XGBoost) to develop models and the SHapley Additive exPlanations method to explain model prediction. The trained model was calibrated before internal, external, and temporal validation. The final XGBoost model was compared against three other machine learning algorithms and five clinical scores. We performed subgroup analysis based on age, sex, and race. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of models using the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) and standardised mortality ratio (SMR) with 95% CIs.

findingsUsing the development dataset (n=50 366) and predictive model building process, the XGBoost algorithm performed the best in all types of validations compared with other machine learning algorithms and clinical scores (internal validation with 5037 patients from 14 US hospitals, AUROC=0·866 [95% CI 0·851-0·880]; external validation in the US population with 20 541 patients from 169 hospitals, AUROC=0·838 [0·829-0·847]; external validation in European population with 2411 patients from one hospital, AUROC=0·833 [0·812-0·853]; temporal validation with 4311 patients from one hospital, AUROC=0·884 [0·869-0·897]). In the external validation set (US population), the median AUROCs of bias evaluations covering eight subgroups were above 0·81, and the overall SMR was 0·99 (0·96-1·03). The top ten risk predictors were the minimum Glasgow Coma Scale score, total urine output, average respiratory rate, mechanical ventilation use, best state of activity, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, geriatric nutritional risk index, code status, age, and maximum blood urea nitrogen. A simplified model containing only the top 20 features (ELDER-ICU-20) had similar predictive performance to the full model.

interpretationThe ELDER-ICU model reliably predicts the risk of in-hospital mortality using routinely collected clinical features. The predictions could inform clinicians about patients who are at elevated risk of deterioration. Prospective validation of this model in clinical practice and a process for continuous performance monitoring and model recalibration are needed.

fundingNational Institutes of Health, National Natural Science Foundation of China, National Special Health Science Program, Health Science and Technology Plan of Zhejiang Province, Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, Drug Clinical Evaluate Research of Chinese Pharmaceutical Association, and National Key R&D Program of China.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessFrailtyAgedHumansIntensive Care UnitsMachine LearningRetrospective StudiesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID37599147
PMCPMC12557411
OpenAlexW4385972885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.