ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Development and external validation of a machine learning model for predicting chronic critical illness in ICU patients with acute pancreatitis.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo develop and validate a machine learning (ML) model to assess the risk of chronic critical illness (CCI) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute pancreatitis (AP).
methodsWe utilised two large, publicly available ICU datasets, MIMIC-IV (v3.1) and the eICU Collaborative Research Database (v2.0), as the development cohort for model construction. A single-centre dataset from China (SZICU) was used for external validation. Three feature selection methods-stepwise regression, Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO), and the Boruta algorithm-were employed. Three ML methods-logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost)-were used for model development. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC), accuracy, F1 score, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Brier score, in both internal and external validation.
resultsThe incidences of CCI were 7.00%, 9.89%, and 20.09% in the training, internal validation, and external validation sets, respectively. Eight predictors of CCI were identified: calcium level, body temperature, vasopressor use, urine output, Glasgow Coma Scale score, albumin level, haemoglobin level, and a history of cerebrovascular disease. In the internal validation set, the RF model achieved an AUROC of 0.85 (0.77-0.91), an AUPRC of 0.53 (0.39-0.69), and a Brier score of 0.07 (0.05-0.09). In the external validation set, the RF model achieved an AUROC of 0.73 (0.64-0.81), an AUPRC of 0.42 (0.30-0.56), and a Brier score of 0.16 (0.12-0.20). Feature importance analysis revealed that calcium level, body temperature, vasopressor use, and urine output were the most influential predictors of CCI.
conclusionsWe developed and validated an ML model using eight clinical variables to predict CCI risk in ICU patients with AP.
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.