ArticlePloS one2026
Machine learning-based on model for explain risk of 24-hour death in critically ill patients in the prehospital setting: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning-based model for predicting 24-hour mortality in critically ill patients using prehospital and admission clinical data. We conducted a retrospective cohort study leveraging data from the prehospital emergency electronic medical record, in-hospital triage, and hospital information systems of a tertiary hospital in Changsha between August 2023 and April 2025. A total of 892 adult patients classified as critically ill were included. Nine machine learning algorithms were trained to predict 24-hour mortality, and model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and F1 score. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was employed to interpret feature contributions. Among the nine algorithms, the Random Forest (RF) model exhibited the most stable and robust performance. Using nine selected features-prehospital heart rate, prehospital and admission systolic and diastolic blood pressure, prehospital and admission oxygen saturation, admission respiratory rate, and level of consciousness, the RF model achieved an AUC of 0.985(95%CI:0.976-0.993) in the training set and 0.863 (95%CI:0.766-0.961) in the testing set, demonstrating high accuracy and potential clinical applicability. SHAP analysis revealed that prehospital heart rate, admission respiratory rate, and blood pressure are the strongest predictors of mortality. Finally, the model was deployed as an interactive web-based tool for real-time clinical application. In summary, this study developed a simple, interpretable, and accurate machine learning model for predicting 24-hour mortality in critically ill prehospital patients. The RF-based model can be intended as an exploratory, hypothesis-generating tool and should supplement, not replace, clinical judgment. Further validation in larger, multi-center prospective cohorts with higher event rates is essential to confirm the robustness and real-world applicability of our findings.
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.