ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
ARDSFlag: an NLP/machine learning algorithm to visualize and detect high-probability ARDS admissions independent of provider recognition and billing codes.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of artificial intelligence algorithms in predicting acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Prone Positioning in a North American Cohort of Hypoxemic Patients on Mechanical Ventilation.Critical care medicine · 2026Observational
- The regulation of artificial intelligence in intensive care units: from narrow tools to generalist systems.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- Machine learning in ARDS: an intensivist's guide to artificial intelligence applications.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- AI-Enabled Precision Nutrition in the ICU: A Narrative Review and Implementation Roadmap.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Large Language Models in Critical Care Medicine: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Multimodal Deep Learning for ARDS Detection.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Decoding large language models for radiology: strategies for fine-tuning and prompt engineering.Radiology advances · 2025Review
- Analyzing Patient Complaints in Web-Based Reviews of Private Hospitals in Selangor, Malaysia, Using Large Language Model-Assisted Content Analysis: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Primer on large language models: an educational overview for intensivists.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
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
backgroundDespite the significance and prevalence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), its detection remains highly variable and inconsistent. In this work, we aim to develop an algorithm (ARDSFlag) to automate the diagnosis of ARDS based on the Berlin definition. We also aim to develop a visualization tool that helps clinicians efficiently assess ARDS criteria.
methodsARDSFlag applies machine learning (ML) and natural language processing (NLP) techniques to evaluate Berlin criteria by incorporating structured and unstructured data in an electronic health record (EHR) system. The study cohort includes 19,534 ICU admissions in the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III) database. The output is the ARDS diagnosis, onset time, and severity.
resultsARDSFlag includes separate text classifiers trained using large training sets to find evidence of bilateral infiltrates in radiology reports (accuracy of 91.9%±0.5%) and heart failure/fluid overload in radiology reports (accuracy 86.1%±0.5%) and echocardiogram notes (accuracy 98.4%±0.3%). A test set of 300 cases, which was blindly and independently labeled for ARDS by two groups of clinicians, shows that ARDSFlag generates an overall accuracy of 89.0% (specificity = 91.7%, recall = 80.3%, and precision = 75.0%) in detecting ARDS cases.
conclusionTo our best knowledge, this is the first study to focus on developing a method to automate the detection of ARDS. Some studies have developed and used other methods to answer other research questions. Expectedly, ARDSFlag generates a significantly higher performance in all accuracy measures compared to those methods.
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.