Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37604974›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Predicting acute clinical deterioration with interpretable machine learning to support emergency care decision making.

Stelios Boulitsakis Logothetis, Darren Green, Mark Holland, Noura Al Moubayed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

4 authors.

Stelios Boulitsakis LogothetisDepartment of Computer Science, University of Durham, Durham, UK.
Darren GreenDepartment of Renal Medicine, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Mark HollandSchool of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences, University of Bolton, Bolton, UK.
Noura Al MoubayedDepartment of Computer Science, University of Durham, Durham, UK. noura.al-moubayed@durham.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_20058
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The emergency department (ED) is a fast-paced environment responsible for large volumes of patients with varied disease acuity. Operational pressures on EDs are increasing, which creates the imperative to efficiently identify patients at imminent risk of acute deterioration. The aim of this study is to systematically compare the performance of machine learning algorithms based on logistic regression, gradient boosted decision trees, and support vector machines for predicting imminent clinical deterioration for patients based on cross-sectional patient data extracted from electronic patient records (EPR) at the point of entry to the hospital. We apply state-of-the-art machine learning methods to predict early patient deterioration, based on their first recorded vital signs, observations, laboratory results, and other predictors documented in the EPR. Clinical deterioration in this study is measured by in-hospital mortality and/or admission to critical care. We build on prior work by incorporating interpretable machine learning and fairness-aware modelling, and use a dataset comprising 118, 886 unplanned admissions to Salford Royal Hospital, UK, to systematically compare model variations for predicting mortality and critical care utilisation within 24 hours of admission. We compare model performance to the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) and yield up to a 0.366 increase in average precision, up to a [Formula: see text] reduction in daily alert rate, and a median 0.599 reduction in differential bias amplification across the protected demographics of age and sex. We use Shapely Additive exPlanations to justify the models' outputs, verify that the captured data associations align with domain knowledge, and pair predictions with the causal context of each patient's most influential characteristics. Introducing our modelling to clinical practice has the potential to reduce alert fatigue and identify high-risk patients with a lower NEWS2 that might be missed currently, but further work is needed to trial the models in clinical practice. We encourage future research to follow a systematised approach to data-driven risk modelling to obtain clinically applicable support tools.

Indexed as

Clinical DeteriorationEmergency Medical ServicesCross-Sectional StudiesDecision MakingHumansMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID37604974
PMCPMC10442440

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.