Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38329094›Full record

ReviewJMIR medical informatics2024

Predicting Hypoxia Using Machine Learning: Systematic Review.

Lena Pigat, Benjamin P Geisler, Seyedmostafa Sheikhalishahi, Julia Sander, Mathias Kaspar, Maximilian Schmutz, Sven Olaf Rohr, Carl Mathis Wild, Sebastian Goss, Sarra Zaghdoudi and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Use of Radiomics in Characterizing Tumor Hypoxia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  3. 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

11 authors.

Lena PigatDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-9199-2242
Benjamin P GeislerDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1704-6067
Seyedmostafa SheikhalishahiDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0121-0160
Julia SanderDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4159-2351
Mathias KasparDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6722-766X
Maximilian SchmutzDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7453-7260
Sven Olaf RohrDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-7574-127X
Carl Mathis WildDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2576-7198
Sebastian GossDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-8069-5713
Sarra ZaghdoudiDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-4958-3020
Ludwig Christian HinskeDigital Medicine, University Hospital of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7273-5899

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Hypoxia is an important risk factor and indicator for the declining health of inpatients. Predicting future hypoxic events using machine learning is a prospective area of study to facilitate time-critical interventions to counter patient health deterioration. Objective: This systematic review aims to summarize and compare previous efforts to predict hypoxic events in the hospital setting using machine learning with respect to their methodology, predictive performance, and assessed population. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using Web of Science, Ovid with Embase and MEDLINE, and Google Scholar. Studies that investigated hypoxia or hypoxemia of hospitalized patients using machine learning models were considered. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Results: After screening, a total of 12 papers were eligible for analysis, from which 32 models were extracted. The included studies showed a variety of population, methodology, and outcome definition. Comparability was further limited due to unclear or high risk of bias for most studies (10/12, 83%). The overall predictive performance ranged from moderate to high. Based on classification metrics, deep learning models performed similar to or outperformed conventional machine learning models within the same studies. Models using only prior peripheral oxygen saturation as a clinical variable showed better performance than models based on multiple variables, with most of these studies (2/3, 67%) using a long short-term memory algorithm. Conclusions: Machine learning models provide the potential to accurately predict the occurrence of hypoxic events based on retrospective data. The heterogeneity of the studies and limited generalizability of their results highlight the need for further validation studies to assess their predictive performance.

Indexed as

anoxiaartificial intelligencedeteriorationhospitalhypoxemiahypoxiahypoxicmachine learningoxygenpredictpredictionpredictivereview methodologyreview methodssystematicsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38329094
PMCPMC10879670

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.