ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Open-source computational pipeline automatically flags instances of acute respiratory distress syndrome from electronic health records.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Physicians, particularly intensivists, face information overload and decision fatigue, underscoring the need for automated diagnostic tools. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) affects over 10% of critical care patients, with over 40% mortality rate, yet is only recognized in 30-70% of cases in clinical settings. We present a reproducible computational pipeline that automates ARDS adjudication in retrospective datasets of mechanically ventilated adults, implementing the Berlin Definition via natural language processing and classification algorithms. We used labeled chest imaging reports from two hospitals to train an XGBoost model to detect bilateral infiltrates, and a labeled subset of attending physician notes from one hospital to train another XGBoost model to detect a pneumonia diagnosis. Both models achieve high discriminative performance on test sets-an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.88 for adjudicating bilateral infiltrates on chest imaging reports, and an AUROC of 0.87 for detecting pneumonia on attending physician notes. We integrated these models with rule-based components and validated the entire pipeline on a subset of healthcare encounters from a third hospital (MIMIC-III). We find a sensitivity of 93.5% in adjudicating ARDS - far surpassing the 22.6% ARDS documentation rate we found for this cohort - along with a false positive rate of 17.4%. We conclude that our reproducible, automated pipeline holds promise for improving ARDS recognition and could aid clinical practice through real-time EHR integration.
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.