ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Interpretable prediction of hospital mortality in bleeding critically ill patients based on machine learning and SHAP.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpretable Machine Learning for In-Hospital Mortality Prediction in ICU Patients Using First-24-Hour Routine Vital Signs: A SHAP-Based MIMIC-IV Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Enhancing large language model clinical support information with machine learning risk and explainability: a feasibility study.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHemorrhage is a prevalent and critical condition in the intensive care unit (ICU), characterized by high incidence, elevated mortality rates, and substantial therapeutic challenges. Accurate prediction of mortality in patients with hemorrhage is essential for developing personalized prevention and treatment strategies. Nevertheless, the implementation of effective predictive models in clinical practice remains limited, primarily due to the lack of robust and interpretable tools.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop an interpretable model for predicting mortality risk in critically ill patients with hemorrhage admitted to ICUs. The SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was applied to interpret the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost)model, identifying key prognostic factors in this population.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we derived data from the eICU Collaborative Research Database (eICU-CRD) to develop and evaluate a predictive model. Clinical data from the first 24 h of ICU admission were extracted, and the dataset was randomly split into training (80%) and validation (20%) sets. Model performance was compared to four other machine learning algorithms using the area under the curve (AUC). SHAP was utilized to interpret the XGBoost model. External validation was subsequently performed using data from the Chinese REFRAIN cohort, which focuses on hemorrhage and coagulopathy in critically ill patients..
trial registrationThe study protocol was retrospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) on December 17, 2024 (Registration number ChiCTR2400094140).
resultsA total of 10,306 eligible patients with hemorrhage were included. The observed in-hospital mortality rate was 11.5%.Among the five models compared, XGBoost demonstrated the highest predictive performance (AUC = 0.81), whereas logistic regression (LR) showed the lowest generalizability(AUC = 0.726). Decision curve analysis revealed that the XGBoost model provided a greater net benefit than other models at threshold probabilities of 10-30%. SHAP analysis identified the top 15 predictors of mortality, with bilirubin level ranked as the most influential variable. External validation using the REFRAIN cohort confirmed the robustness of model(AUC = 0.776).
conclusionsThe interpretable predictive model improves mortality risk stratification in ICU patients with hemorrhage, supporting clinicians in optimizing treatment plans and resource allocation. Enhanced model transparency through SHAP explanations may facilitate clinical adoption by improving trust in model reliability.
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.