ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Use of machine learning models to predict mechanical ventilation, ECMO, and mortality in COVID-19.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Patients with severe COVID-19 may require MV or ECMO. Predicting who will require interventions and the duration of those interventions are challenging due to the diverse responses among patients and the dynamic nature of the disease. As such, there is a need for better prediction of the duration and outcomes of MV use in patients, to improve patient care and aid with MV and ECMO allocation. Here we develop and examine the performance of ML models to predict MV duration, ECMO, and mortality for patients with COVID-19. Methods: In this retrospective prognostic study, hierarchical machine-learning models were developed to predict MV duration and outcome prediction from demographic data and time-series data consisting of vital signs and laboratory results. We train our models on 10,378 patients with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) virus testing from Emory's COVID CRADLE Dataset who sought treatment at Emory University Hospital between February 28, 2020, to January 24, 2022. Analysis was conducted between January 10, 2022, and April 5, 2024. The main outcomes and measures were the AUROC, AUPRC and the F-score for MV duration, need for ECMO, and mortality prediction. Results: Data from 10,378 patients with COVID-19 (median [IQR] age, 60 [48-72] years; 5,281 [50.89%] women) were included. Overall MV class distributions for 0 days, 1-4 days, 5-9 days, 10-14 days, 15-19 days, 20-24 days, 25-29 days, and ≥30 days of MV were 8,141 (78.44%), 812 (7.82%), 325 (3.13%), 241 (2.32%), 153 (1.47%), 97 (0.93%), 87 (0.84%), and 522 (5.03%), respectively. Overall ECMO use and mortality rates were 15 (0.14%) and 1,114 (10.73%), respectively. On MV duration, ECMO use, and mortality outcomes, the highest-performing model reached weighted average AUROC scores of 0.873, 0.902, and 0.774, and the highest-performing model reached weighted average AUPRC scores of 0.790, 0.999, and 0.893. Conclusions and relevance: Hierarchical ML models trained on vital signs, laboratory results, and demographic data show promise for the prediction of MV duration, ECMO use, and mortality in COVID-19 patients.
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.