ArticleCritical care explorations2025
Augmenting Mortality Prediction in Critically Ill Adults With Medication Data and Machine Learning Models.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Early Detection of Clinical Deterioration in ICU Patients With Respiratory Failure Receiving Vasoactive Support: A Machine Learning Approach to Identifying High-Risk Individuals.Health science reports · 2026Article
- A Data-Driven Medication Regimen Complexity Score for Critically Ill Patients: MRC-ICU 2.0.Pharmacotherapy · 2026Observational
- Prediction of pharmacist medication interventions using medication regimen complexity.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Consensus recommendations for the integration of critical care pharmacists on intensive care unit teams: Endorsed by the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, American College of Clinical Pharmacy, American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, Institute for Safe Medication Practices, and Society of Critical Care Medicine.Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMortality prediction in ICU adults is only marginally improved when medication regimen complexity (MRC) data is incorporated into traditional regression models. Machine learning (ML) may improve this prediction.
objectiveTo compare the performance of different ML approaches incorporating MRC data to both traditional and advanced regression approaches, with and without MRC data, to predict hospital mortality in ICU adults. DERIVATION COHORT: Nine hundred ninety-one ICU adults at the University of North Carolina (UNC) Health System. VALIDATION COHORT: A temporally distinct cohort of 4,878 ICU adults at UNC and an external cohort of 12,290 ICU adults at the Oregon Health and Science University. PREDICTION MODEL: Supervised, classification-based ML models (e.g., Random Forest, Support Vector Machine [SVM], and XGBoost) were developed. Twenty-seven variables at ICU baseline (age, sex, service, diagnosis) and 24 hours (illness severity, supportive care use, fluid balance, laboratory values, MRC-ICU, vasopressor use) associated with mortality, and 14 missingness indicator variables, were included in each ML model. Traditional and advanced (equipped with linear predictors, predictors in nature cubic splines, predictors in smoothing cubic splines, and local linear predictors) regression models were optimized using stepwise selection by Bayesian Information Criterion. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) was compared among models.
resultsRandom Forest, SVM, and XGBoost achieved AUROCs of 0.83, 0.85, and 0.82, respectively, on the test set. Traditional regression models based on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, MRC-ICU + Sequential Organ Failure Assessment + APACHE II with and without an interaction term, and a full model including all 27 available variables demonstrated AUROCs of 0.81, 0.72, 0.82, 0.83, and 0.86, respectively. Advanced regression models yielded AUROCs of 0.85, 0.86, 0.85, and 0.84, respectively. The MRC-ICU exhibited a moderate level of feature importance in both XGBoost and Random Forest models. Models demonstrated lower performance in the validation cohorts.
conclusionsUse of ML, compared with traditional and advanced regression methods, did not improve hospital mortality prediction despite medication data inclusion. The MRC-ICU demonstrates moderate feature importance in select ML models.
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.