ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2025
Predicting 28-Day Mortality in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy: A Novel Interpretable Machine Learning Approach.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to develop and validate an interpretable machine learning (ML) model to predict 28-day all-cause mortality in critically ill patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), facilitating early risk stratification and clinical decision-making. Patients and Methods: Data from 1362 CRRT patients were analyzed, including 1224 from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database (training cohort) and 138 from a Chinese hospital (external validation cohort). Feature selection was performed using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, support vector machine-recursive feature elimination, and Boruta algorithms. Nine machine learning models were constructed and compared, including Gaussian process (GP), ensemble methods (gradient boosting machine and eXtreme gradient boosting), and other classifiers. Model performance was assessed via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), decision curve analysis, and other metrics. The SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) method was used to interpret the ML models. Results: The GP model demonstrated consistent predictive performance across all cohorts, with training (AUC=0.841, accuracy=76.8%, sensitivity=65.5%), internal validation (AUC=0.794, accuracy=73.4%, sensitivity=60.0%), and external validation (AUC=0.780, accuracy=63.8%, sensitivity=39.0%) sets. Key predictors included red cell distribution width, age, lactate, septic shock, and vasoactive drug use. SHAP analysis provided transparent insights into feature contributions. Conclusion: The GP-based model accurately predicts 28-day mortality in CRRT patients and demonstrates strong generalizability. By integrating SHAP explanations, it offers clinicians an interpretable tool to identify high-risk patients early, potentially improving outcomes.
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.