ArticleResearch square2024
Machine Learning Identifies Variation in Timing of Palliative Care Consultations Among Traumatic Brain Injury Patients.
Article in Research square, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Objective Timely palliative care involvement offers demonstrable benefits for traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients; however, palliative care consultations (PCCs) are used inconsistently during TBI management. This study aimed to employ advanced machine learning techniques to elucidate the primary drivers of PCC timing variability for TBI patients. Methods Data on admission, hospital course, and outcomes were collected for a cohort of 232 TBI patients who received both PCCs and neurosurgical consultations during the same hospitalization. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and K-means clustering were used to identify patient phenotypes, which were then compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. An extreme gradient boosting model (XGBoost) was employed to determine drivers of PCC timing, with model interpretation performed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Results Cluster A (n = 86) consisted mainly of older (median [IQR] = 87 [78, 94] years), White females with mild TBIs and demonstrated the shortest time-to-PCC (2.5 [1.0, 7.0] days). Cluster B (n = 108) also sustained mild TBIs but comprised moderately younger (81 [75, 86] years) married White males with later PCC (5.0 [3.0, 10.8] days). Cluster C (n = 38) represented much younger (46.5 [29.5, 59.8] years), more severely injured, non-White patients with the latest PCC initiation (9.0 [4.2, 17.0] days). The clusters did not differ by discharge disposition (p = 0.4) or frequency inpatient mortality (p > 0.9); however, Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant difference in the time from admission to PCC (p < 0.001), despite no differences in time from admission to mortality (p = 0.18). SHAP analysis of the XGBoost model identified age, sex, and race as the most influential drivers of PCC timing. Conclusions This study highlights crucial disparities in PCC timing for TBI patients and underscores the need for targeted strategies to ensure timely and equitable palliative care integration for this vulnerable population.
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.