Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40392588›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2025

Early Prediction of Mortality Risk in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ruimin Tan, Chen Ge, Zhe Li, Yating Yan, He Guo, Wenjing Song, Qiong Zhu, Quansheng Du

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

8 authors.

Ruimin TanSchool of Clinical Medical, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3705-9459
Chen GeCritical Care Department, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3435-9225
Zhe LiSchool of Graduate, Chengde Medical University, Chengde, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8492-4531
Yating YanSchool of Clinical Medical, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6137-5396
He GuoCritical Care Department, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-1439-1203
Wenjing SongCritical Care Department, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9022-8872
Qiong ZhuDepartment of Orthopaedics, The People's Hospital of Shizhu, Chongqing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-8024-7255
Quansheng DuCritical Care Department, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8477-2347

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition associated with high mortality rates. Despite advancements in critical care, reliable early prediction methods for ARDS-related mortality remain elusive. Accurate risk assessment is crucial for timely intervention and improved patient outcomes. Machine learning (ML) techniques have emerged as promising tools for mortality prediction in patients with ARDS, leveraging complex clinical datasets to identify key prognostic factors. However, the efficacy of ML-based models remains uncertain. This systematic review aims to assess the value of ML models in the early prediction of ARDS mortality risk and to provide evidence supporting the development of simplified, clinically applicable ML-based scoring tools for prognosis.

objectiveThis study systematically reviewed available literature on ML-based ARDS mortality prediction models, primarily aiming to evaluate the predictive performance of these models and compare their efficacy with conventional scoring systems. It also sought to identify limitations and provide insights for improving future ML-based prediction tools.

methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Embase, covering publications from inception to April 27, 2024. Studies developing or validating ML-based ARDS mortality predicting models were considered for inclusion. The methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity in model performance based on dataset characteristics and validation approaches.

resultsIn total, 21 studies involving a total of 31,291 patients with ARDS were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that ML models achieved relatively high predictive performance. In the training datasets, the pooled concordance index (C-index) was 0.84 (95% CI 0.81-0.86), while for in-hospital mortality prediction, the pooled C-index was 0.83 (95% CI 0.81-0.86). In the external validation datasets, the pooled C-index was 0.81 (95% CI 0.78-0.84), and the corresponding value for in-hospital mortality prediction was 0.80 (95% CI 0.77-0.84). ML models outperformed traditional scoring tools, which demonstrated lower predictive performance. The pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) for standard scoring systems was 0.7 (95% CI 0.67-0.72). Specifically, 2 widely used clinical scoring systems, the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS-II), demonstrated ROC-AUCs of 0.64 (95% CI 0.62-0.67) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.66-0.74), respectively.

conclusionsML-based models exhibited superior predictive accuracy over conventional scoring tools, suggesting their potential use in early ARDS mortality risk assessment. However, further research is needed to refine these models, improve their interpretability, and enhance their clinical applicability. Future efforts should focus on developing simplified, efficient, and user-friendly ML-based prediction tools that integrate seamlessly into clinical workflows. Such advancements may facilitate the early identification of high-risk patients, enabling timely interventions and personalized, risk-based prevention strategies to improve ARDS outcomes.

Indexed as

Respiratory Distress SyndromeHumansMachine LearningPrognosisRisk Assessmentacute respiratory distress syndromemachine learningmeta-analysismortalitysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40392588
PMCPMC12134695

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.