Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42078409›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026

Decision Curve Analysis for Evaluating Machine Learning Models for Next-Day Transfer Out of ICU.

Margaret Pozo, Abigail Pape, Brian Locke, Warren Woodrich Pettine

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Margaret PozoDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Utah, USA.
Abigail PapeDepartment of Internal Medicine, The University of Utah, USA.
Brian LockeDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Intermountain Health, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3588-5238
Warren Woodrich PettineDepartment of Psychiatry, The University of Utah, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0063-0902

Funding

Informing best practices for evaluation and treatment of myocardial injury during sepsisR01HL169521 · NHLBI · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI Allan J. Walkey · 2023 to 2026
$2.8M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL169521NIA NIH HHS L70 AG096751
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Timely identification of intensive care unit (ICU) patients likely to exit the unit can support anticipatory workflows such as chart review, eligibility screening, and patient outreach prior to transfer. Most ICU discharge prediction studies report discrimination and calibration, but these metrics do not quantify the decision consequences of acting on predictions. Using adult ICU admissions from MIMIC-IV, we represented each ICU stay as a sequence of daily clinical summaries and trained logistic regression, random forest, and XGBoost models to predict next day ICU transfer. Models achieved ROC AUC of 0.80-0.84 with differing calibration. We evaluated decision utility using decision curve analysis (DCA), where positive predictions trigger proactive review. Across thresholds, model guided strategies outperformed review-all, review-none, and a simple clinical rule. To translate net benefit into implementable operations, we modeled a clinical trial recruitment workflow with an 8 hour daily time constraint, incorporating chart review and consent effort. At a feasible operating threshold (0.23), the model flagged ~23 charts/day and yielded ~1.23 enrollments/day under conservative eligibility and consent assumptions. These results demonstrate that DCA provides a transparent framework for determining when ICU transfer predictions are worth using and how thresholds should be selected to align with real world workflow constraints.

Identifiers

PMID42078409
PMCPMC13131748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.