Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38161734›Full record

ArticleCritical care explorations2024

IntraCranial pressure prediction AlgoRithm using machinE learning (I-CARE): Training and Validation Study.

Nicholas Fong, Jean Feng, Alan Hubbard, Lauren Eyler Dang, Romain Pirracchio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care explorations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Machine Learning Approaches to Prognostication in Traumatic Brain Injury.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Nicholas FongDepartment of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Jean FengDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Alan HubbardDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.
Lauren Eyler DangDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.
Romain PirracchioDepartment of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesElevated intracranial pressure (ICP) is a potentially devastating complication of neurologic injury. Developing an ICP prediction algorithm to help the clinician adjust treatments and potentially prevent elevated ICP episodes.

designRetrospective study.

settingThree hundred thirty-five ICUs at 208 hospitals in the United States. SUBJECTS: Adults patients from the electronic ICU (eICU) Collaborative Research Database was used to train an ensemble machine learning model to predict the ICP 30 minutes in the future. Predictive performance was evaluated using a left-out test dataset and externally evaluated on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III (MIMIC-III) Matched Waveform Database.

interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsPredictors included age, assigned sex, laboratories, medications and infusions, input/output, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) components, and time-series vitals (heart rate, ICP, mean arterial pressure, respiratory rate, and temperature). Each patient ICU stay was divided into successive 95-minute timeblocks. For each timeblock, the model was trained on nontime-varying covariates as well as on 12 observations of time-varying covariates at 5-minute intervals and asked to predict the 5-minute median ICP 30 minutes after the last observed ICP value. Data from 931 patients with ICP monitoring in the eICU dataset were extracted (46,207 timeblocks). The root mean squared error was 4.51 mm Hg in the eICU test set and 3.56 mm Hg in the MIMIC-III dataset. The most important variables driving ICP prediction were previous ICP history, patients' temperature, weight, serum creatinine, age, GCS, and hemodynamic parameters.

conclusionsIntraCranial pressure prediction AlgoRithm using machinE learning, an ensemble machine learning model, trained to predict the ICP of a patient 30 minutes in the future based on baseline characteristics and vitals data from the past hour showed promising predictive performance including in an external validation dataset.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencebrain injuryintracranial pressuremachine learningprediction

Identifiers

PMID38161734
PMCPMC10756747

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.