ArticleScientific reports2024
Machine learning for predicting device-associated infection and 30-day survival outcomes after invasive device procedure in intensive care unit patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sprayable lipid-based lubricated hydrogel coating for alleviating catheter-related mucosal damage and pain.Bioactive materials · 2026Article
- Improving mortality prediction in critically ill cancer patients with a multidimensional machine learning model.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Article
- Cumulative Vulnerability in Cardiac Critical Care: A Framework for Understanding Healthcare-Associated Infections and Their Progression to Severe Infection and Sepsis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to preliminarily develop machine learning (ML) models capable of predicting the risk of device-associated infection and 30-day outcomes following invasive device procedures in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The study utilized data from 8574 ICU patients who underwent invasive procedures, sourced from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV version 2.2 database. Patients were allocated into training and validation datasets in a 7:3 ratio. Seven ML models were employed for predicting device-associated infections, while five models were used for predicting 30-day survival outcomes. Model performance was primarily evaluated using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for infection prediction and the survival model's concordance index (C-index). Top-performing models progressively reduced the number of variables based on their importance, thereby optimizing practical utility. The inclusion of all variables demonstrated that extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and extra survival trees (EST) models yielded superior discriminatory performance. Notably, when restricted to the top 10 variables, both models maintained performance levels comparable to when all variables were included. In the validation cohort, the XGBoost model, with the top 10 variables, achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.810 (95% CI 0.808-0.812), an area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.226 (95% CI 0.222-0.230), and a Brier score (BS) of 0.053 (95% CI 0.053-0.054). The EST model, with the top 10 variables, reported a C-index of 0.756 (95% CI 0.754-0.757), a time-dependent AUC of 0.759 (95% CI 0.763-0.775), and an integrated Brier score (IBS) of 0.087 (95% CI 0.087-0.087). Both models are accessible via a web application. The internally evaluated XGBoost and EST models demonstrated exceptional predictive accuracy for device-associated infection risks and 30-day survival outcomes post-invasive procedures in ICU patients. Further validation is required to confirm the clinical utility of these two models in future studies.
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.