• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

生命体征、心率变异性和复杂性以及机器学习在识别创伤患者是否需要进行挽救生命干预方面的效用。

Utility of vital signs, heart rate variability and complexity, and machine learning for identifying the need for lifesaving interventions in trauma patients.

作者信息

Liu Nehemiah T, Holcomb John B, Wade Charles E, Darrah Mark I, Salinas Jose

机构信息

*US Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston; and †Center for Translational Injury Research, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas; and ‡Athena GTX, Inc, Des Moines, Iowa.

出版信息

Shock. 2014 Aug;42(2):108-14. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000186.

DOI:10.1097/SHK.0000000000000186
PMID:24727872
Abstract

To date, no studies have attempted to utilize data from a combination of vital signs, heart rate variability and complexity (HRV, HRC), as well as machine learning (ML), for identifying the need for lifesaving interventions (LSIs) in trauma patients. The objectives of this study were to examine the utility of the above for identifying LSI needs and compare different LSI-associated models, with the hypothesis that an ML model would be superior in performance over multivariate logistic regression models. One hundred four patients transported from the injury scene via helicopter were selected for the study. A wireless vital signs monitor was attached to the patient's arm and used to capture physiologic data, including HRV and HRC. The power of vital sign measurements, HRV, HRC, and Glasgow Coma Scale score (GCS) to identify patients requiring LSIs was estimated using multivariate logistic regression and ML. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were also obtained. Thirty-two patients underwent 75 LSIs. After logistic regression, ROC curves demonstrated better identification for LSIs using heart rate (HR) and HRC (area under the curve [AUC] of 0.81) than using HR alone (AUC of 0.73). Likewise, ROC curves demonstrated better identification for LSIs using GCS and HRC (AUC of 0.94) than using GCS and HR (AUC of 0.92). Importantly, ROC curves demonstrated that an ML model using HR, GCS, and HRC (AUC of 0.99) had superior performance over multivariate logistic regression models for identifying the need for LSIs in trauma patients. Development of computer decision support systems should utilize vital signs, HRC, and ML in order to achieve more accurate diagnostic capabilities, such as identification of needs for LSIs in trauma patients.

摘要

迄今为止,尚无研究尝试利用生命体征、心率变异性和复杂性(HRV、HRC)以及机器学习(ML)的数据来识别创伤患者的救生干预需求(LSI)。本研究的目的是检验上述数据在识别LSI需求方面的效用,并比较不同的LSI相关模型,假设ML模型在性能上优于多元逻辑回归模型。本研究选取了104例通过直升机从受伤现场转运而来的患者。将无线生命体征监测仪连接到患者手臂上,用于采集生理数据,包括HRV和HRC。使用多元逻辑回归和ML估计生命体征测量值、HRV、HRC和格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分(GCS)识别需要LSI的患者的能力。还获得了受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线。32例患者接受了75次LSI。逻辑回归后,ROC曲线显示,使用心率(HR)和HRC识别LSI的效果(曲线下面积[AUC]为0.81)优于单独使用HR(AUC为0.73)。同样,ROC曲线显示,使用GCS和HRC识别LSI的效果(AUC为0.94)优于使用GCS和HR(AUC为0.92)。重要的是,ROC曲线表明,使用HR、GCS和HRC的ML模型(AUC为0.99)在识别创伤患者的LSI需求方面比多元逻辑回归模型具有更优的性能。计算机决策支持系统的开发应利用生命体征、HRC和ML,以实现更准确的诊断能力,如识别创伤患者的LSI需求。

相似文献

1
Utility of vital signs, heart rate variability and complexity, and machine learning for identifying the need for lifesaving interventions in trauma patients.生命体征、心率变异性和复杂性以及机器学习在识别创伤患者是否需要进行挽救生命干预方面的效用。
Shock. 2014 Aug;42(2):108-14. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000186.
2
Improving the prediction of mortality and the need for life-saving interventions in trauma patients using standard vital signs with heart-rate variability and complexity.利用具有心率变异性和复杂性的标准生命体征,改善对创伤患者死亡率的预测以及对挽救生命干预措施的需求。
Shock. 2015 Jun;43(6):549-55. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000356.
3
Evaluation of standard versus nonstandard vital signs monitors in the prehospital and emergency departments: results and lessons learned from a trauma patient care protocol.院前和急诊科标准与非标准生命体征监测仪的评估:创伤患者护理方案的结果与经验教训
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014 Sep;77(3 Suppl 2):S121-6. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000192.
4
Heart-rate complexity for prediction of prehospital lifesaving interventions in trauma patients.心率复杂性用于预测创伤患者的院前救生干预措施
J Trauma. 2008 Oct;65(4):813-9. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181848241.
5
Data quality of a wearable vital signs monitor in the pre-hospital and emergency departments for enhancing prediction of needs for life-saving interventions in trauma patients.用于增强创伤患者挽救生命干预需求预测的可穿戴生命体征监测仪在院前和急诊科的数据质量。
J Med Eng Technol. 2015;39(6):316-21. doi: 10.3109/03091902.2015.1054524. Epub 2015 Jun 19.
6
Real-time heart rate entropy predicts the need for lifesaving interventions in trauma activation patients.实时心率熵可预测创伤激活患者救生干预的需求。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013 Oct;75(4):607-12. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31829bb991.
7
Inefficacy of standard vital signs for predicting mortality and the need for prehospital life-saving interventions in blunt trauma patients transported via helicopter: A repeated call for new measures.标准生命体征对预测通过直升机转运的钝性创伤患者的死亡率及院前救生干预需求的无效性:对新措施的再次呼吁。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017 Jul;83(1 Suppl 1):S98-S103. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001482.
8
Is heart period variability associated with the administration of lifesaving interventions in individual prehospital trauma patients with normal standard vital signs?在生命体征正常的个体创伤院前患者中,心脏周期变异性与救命干预的实施是否相关?
Crit Care Med. 2010 Aug;38(8):1666-73. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181e74cab.
9
Prehospital physiologic data and lifesaving interventions in trauma patients.创伤患者的院前生理数据及救生干预措施。
Mil Med. 2005 Jan;170(1):7-13. doi: 10.7205/milmed.170.1.7.
10
Manual vital signs reliably predict need for life-saving interventions in trauma patients.手动测量生命体征能够可靠地预测创伤患者对挽救生命干预措施的需求。
J Trauma. 2005 Oct;59(4):821-8; discussion 828-9. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000188125.44129.7c.

引用本文的文献

1
A Machine Learning Trauma Triage Model for Critical Care Transport.一种用于重症监护转运的机器学习创伤分诊模型。
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Jun 2;8(6):e259639. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.9639.
2
Are crystalloid-based fluid expansion strategies still relevant in the first hours of trauma induced hemorrhagic shock?基于晶体液的液体复苏策略在创伤性失血性休克的最初数小时内是否仍然适用?
Crit Care. 2024 Dec 18;28(1):416. doi: 10.1186/s13054-024-05185-7.
3
PROGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF MACHINE LEARNING MODELS FOR IN-HOSPITAL MORTALITY AMONG CHILDREN WITH PHOENIX SEPSIS ADMITTED TO THE PEDIATRIC INTENSIVE CARE UNIT.
儿科重症监护病房收治的凤凰型脓毒症患儿院内死亡机器学习模型的预测准确性
Shock. 2025 Jan 1;63(1):80-87. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000002501.
4
Use of artificial intelligence to support prehospital traumatic injury care: A scoping review.利用人工智能支持院前创伤护理:一项范围综述。
J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2024 Sep 4;5(5):e13251. doi: 10.1002/emp2.13251. eCollection 2024 Oct.
5
Digitalization in orthopaedics: a narrative review.骨科领域的数字化:一篇叙述性综述。
Front Surg. 2024 Jan 11;10:1325423. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1325423. eCollection 2023.
6
Exploring the effectiveness of artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning in trauma triage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.探索人工智能、机器学习和深度学习在创伤分诊中的有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Digit Health. 2023 Oct 9;9:20552076231205736. doi: 10.1177/20552076231205736. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.
7
Artificial intelligence and machine learning in prehospital emergency care: A scoping review.院前急救中的人工智能与机器学习:一项范围综述。
iScience. 2023 Jul 17;26(8):107407. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.107407. eCollection 2023 Aug 18.
8
Science fiction or clinical reality: a review of the applications of artificial intelligence along the continuum of trauma care.科幻还是临床现实:创伤护理连续体中人工智能应用的综述。
World J Emerg Surg. 2023 Mar 6;18(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s13017-022-00469-1.
9
Artificial intelligence and machine learning for hemorrhagic trauma care.人工智能和机器学习在出血性创伤护理中的应用。
Mil Med Res. 2023 Feb 16;10(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s40779-023-00444-0.
10
Decision support by machine learning systems for acute management of severely injured patients: A systematic review.机器学习系统用于严重创伤患者急性管理的决策支持:一项系统综述。
Front Surg. 2022 Oct 10;9:924810. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.924810. eCollection 2022.