ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Interpretable machine learning for in-hospital mortality prediction in ICU patients with traumatic brain injury.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: TBI is associated with high ICU mortality, yet traditional prognostic scores often lack accuracy due to linear assumptions. This study aimed to develop an interpretable machine learning model to predict in-hospital mortality in TBI patients, combining high predictive performance with clinical transparency. Methods: This retrospective analysis utilized TBI clinical records (2008-2019) retrieved from the MIMIC-IV database. We collected comprehensive baseline data including demographics, comorbidities, vital signs, laboratory parameters, disease severity scores, and therapeutic interventions. To identify the most robust predictors, we employed a rigorous intersectional feature selection strategy combining Univariate Logistic Regression ( Results: Among the 2,691 included TBI patients, 1,716 (63.8%) were male, and the median age was 66 (IQR 48-81) years. The primary outcome, in-hospital mortality, occurred in 316 patients (11.7%). A final predictive set of 12 variables was identified: demographic and clinical metrics (age, GCS, temperature), lab results (anion gap, glucose, PT, RDW, WBC, urea nitrogen), and key clinical interventions or conditions (acidosis, mannitol, and sedatives). Among the seven algorithms, the XGBoost model achieved the best performance with the highest AUROC of 0.873 (95% CI: 0.842-0.906) and superior calibration (Brier score = 0.078). SHAP analysis identified GCS, age, anion gap, and glucose as the top mortality drivers, and revealed critical non-linear relationships, such as a U-shaped association between body temperature and mortality risk. Conclusion: We successfully developed and validated an interpretable XGBoost-based model that demonstrates robust discriminative capacity, excellent calibration, and high sensitivity for predicting in-hospital mortality in ICU patients with TBI. By integrating SHAP analysis, the model provides intuitive explanations for both population-level risk drivers and individual predictions, effectively bridging the gap between predictive accuracy and clinical interpretability to facilitate personalized decision-making in the ICU.
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.