ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Machine Learning-Based Risk Prediction of Discharge Status for Sepsis.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As a severe inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis presents complex challenges in predicting patient outcomes due to its unclear pathogenesis and the unstable discharge status of affected individuals. In this study, we develop a machine learning-based method for predicting the discharge status of sepsis patients, aiming to improve treatment decisions. To enhance the robustness of our analysis against outliers, we incorporate robust statistical methods, specifically the minimum covariance determinant technique. We utilize the random forest imputation method to effectively manage and impute missing data. For feature selection, we employ Lasso penalized logistic regression, which efficiently identifies significant predictors and reduces model complexity, setting the stage for the application of more complex predictive methods. Our predictive analysis incorporates multiple machine learning methods, including random forest, support vector machine, and XGBoost. We compare the prediction performance of these methods with Lasso penalized logistic regression to identify the most effective approach. Each method's performance is rigorously evaluated through ten iterations of 10-fold cross-validation to ensure robust and reliable results. Our comparative analysis reveals that XGBoost surpasses the other models, demonstrating its exceptional capability to navigate the complexities of sepsis data effectively.
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.