Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39964993›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Development and validation of interpretable machine learning models for triage patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

Zheng Liu, Wenqi Shu, Hongyan Liu, Xuan Zhang, Wei Chong

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Zheng LiuDepartment of Emergency, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8597-3810
Wenqi ShuDepartment of Emergency, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Hongyan LiuDepartment of Emergency, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Xuan ZhangDepartment of Emergency, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Wei ChongDepartment of Emergency, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDeveloping and validating interpretable machine learning (ML) models for predicting whether triaged patients need to be admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). MEASURES: The study analyzed 189,167 emergency patients from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database, with the outcome being ICU admission. Three models were compared: Model 1 based on Emergency Severity Index (ESI), Model 2 on vital signs, and Model 3 on vital signs, demographic characteristics, medical history, and chief complaints. Nine ML algorithms were employed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), F1 Score, Positive Predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value, Brier score, calibration curves, and decision curves analysis were used to evaluate the performance of the models. SHapley Additive exPlanations was used for explaining ML models.

resultsThe AUC of Model 3 was superior to that of Model 1 and Model 2. In Model 3, the top four algorithms with the highest AUC were Gradient Boosting (0.81), Logistic Regression (0.81), naive Bayes (0.80), and Random Forest (0.80). Upon further comparison of the four algorithms, Gradient Boosting was slightly superior to Random Forest and Logistic Regression, while naive Bayes performed the worst.

conclusionsThis study developed an interpretable ML triage model using vital signs, demographics, medical history, and chief complaints, proving more effective than traditional models in predicting ICU admission. Interpretable ML aids clinical decisions during triage.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsMachine LearningTriageAdultAgedAlgorithmsArea Under CurveBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient AdmissionROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID39964993
PMCPMC11835250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.