ArticleInfection and drug resistance2023
Predicting Antibiotic Resistance in ICUs Patients by Applying Machine Learning in Vietnam.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- An explainable machine learning approach to predicting carbapenem resistance inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Evaluating antimicrobial resistance and clinical outcomes in surgical ICU using a machine learning perspective: a retrospective observational study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Observational
- Role of artificial intelligence in ICU therapeutic decision-making for severe infections.Current opinion in critical care · 2025Review
- Machine Learning Model for Predicting Multidrug Resistance in ClinicalAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Artificial intelligence in drug resistance management.3 Biotech · 2025Review
- Can we rely on artificial intelligence to guide antimicrobial therapy? A systematic literature review.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
- Development of a machine learning-based predictive model for intraoperative hypothermia risk during radical surgery for oral cancer.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- The role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in predicting and combating antimicrobial resistance.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- Deep learning model for personalized prediction of positive MRSA culture using time-series electronic health records.Nature communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are used extensively in HICs to detect and control antibiotic resistance (AMR) in laboratories and clinical institutions. ML is designed to predict outcome variables using an algorithm to enable "machines" to learn the "rules" from the data. ML is increasingly being applied in intensive care units to identify AMR and to assist empiric antibiotic therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of ML models for predicting AMR bacteria and resistance to antibiotics in two Vietnamese hospitals. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study combined with retrospective was conducted from 1st January 2020 to 30th June 2022. Five models were developed to predict antibiotic resistance of bacterial infections of ICU patients. Two datasets were prepared to predict AMR bacteria and antibiotics with ML models. The performance of the prediction models was evaluated by various indicators (sensitivity, specificity, precision, accuracy, F1-score, PRC, AuROC, and NormMCC) to determine the optimal time point for data selection. Python version 3.8 was used for statistical analyses. Results: The accuracy, F1-score, AuROC, and normMMC of LightGBM, XGBoost, and Random Forest models were higher than those of other models in both datasets. In both datasets 1 and 2, accuracy, F1-score, AuROC and normMCC of the XGBoost model were the highest among five models (from 0.890 to 1.000). Only Random Forest models had specificity scores higher than 0.850. High scores of sensitivity, accuracy, precision, F1-score, and normMCC indicated that the models were making accurate predictions for datasets 1 and 2. Conclusion: XGBoost, LightGBM, and Random Forest were the best-performed machine learning models to predict antibiotic resistance of bacterial infections of ICUs patients using the patients' EMRs.
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.