• 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

利用本地电子病历数据定制疾病严重程度评分

Customization of a Severity of Illness Score Using Local Electronic Medical Record Data.

作者信息

Lee Joon, Maslove David M

机构信息

School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Department of Medicine & Critical Care Program, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

J Intensive Care Med. 2017 Jan;32(1):38-47. doi: 10.1177/0885066615585951. Epub 2015 May 12.

DOI:10.1177/0885066615585951
PMID:25969432
Abstract

PURPOSE

Severity of illness (SOI) scores are traditionally based on archival data collected from a wide range of clinical settings. Mortality prediction using SOI scores tends to underperform when applied to contemporary cases or those that differ from the case-mix of the original derivation cohorts. We investigated the use of local clinical data captured from hospital electronic medical records (EMRs) to improve the predictive performance of traditional severity of illness scoring.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis using data from the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care II (MIMIC-II) database, which contains clinical data from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. A total of 17 490 intensive care unit (ICU) admissions with complete data were included, from 4 different service types: medical ICU, surgical ICU, coronary care unit, and cardiac surgery recovery unit. We developed customized SOI scores trained on data from each service type, using the clinical variables employed in the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS). In-hospital, 30-day, and 2-year mortality predictions were compared with those obtained from using the original SAPS using the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUROC) as well as the area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Test performance in different cohorts stratified by severity of organ injury was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Most customized scores (30 of 39) significantly outperformed SAPS with respect to both AUROC and AUPRC. Enhancements over SAPS were greatest for patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery and for prediction of 2-year mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Custom models based on ICU-specific data provided better mortality prediction than traditional SAPS scoring using the same predictor variables. Our local data approach demonstrates the value of electronic data capture in the ICU, of secondary uses of EMR data, and of local customization of SOI scoring.

摘要

目的

疾病严重程度(SOI)评分传统上基于从广泛临床环境中收集的存档数据。当将SOI评分用于当代病例或与原始推导队列病例组合不同的病例时,其死亡率预测往往表现不佳。我们研究了利用从医院电子病历(EMR)中获取的本地临床数据来提高传统疾病严重程度评分的预测性能。

方法

我们使用重症监护多参数智能监测II(MIMIC-II)数据库中的数据进行了一项回顾性分析,该数据库包含马萨诸塞州波士顿贝斯以色列女执事医疗中心的临床数据。共纳入了17490例有完整数据的重症监护病房(ICU)入院病例,来自4种不同的服务类型:内科ICU、外科ICU、冠心病监护病房和心脏手术恢复病房。我们使用简化急性生理学评分(SAPS)中使用的临床变量,开发了针对每种服务类型的数据进行训练的定制SOI评分。将院内、30天和2年死亡率预测与使用原始SAPS获得的预测进行比较,使用受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)以及精确召回率曲线下面积(AUPRC)。还评估了按器官损伤严重程度分层的不同队列中的测试性能。

结果

大多数定制评分(39个中的30个)在AUROC和AUPRC方面均显著优于SAPS。对于接受心血管手术的患者和2年死亡率的预测,相对于SAPS的改进最大。

结论

基于ICU特定数据的定制模型在使用相同预测变量时比传统SAPS评分提供了更好的死亡率预测。我们的本地数据方法证明了ICU中电子数据采集、EMR数据的二次使用以及SOI评分的本地定制的价值。

相似文献

1
Customization of a Severity of Illness Score Using Local Electronic Medical Record Data.利用本地电子病历数据定制疾病严重程度评分
J Intensive Care Med. 2017 Jan;32(1):38-47. doi: 10.1177/0885066615585951. Epub 2015 May 12.
2
Mortality prediction in intensive care units with the Super ICU Learner Algorithm (SICULA): a population-based study.重症监护病房死亡率预测的超级 ICU 学习者算法(SICULA):一项基于人群的研究。
Lancet Respir Med. 2015 Jan;3(1):42-52. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(14)70239-5. Epub 2014 Nov 24.
3
Early hospital mortality prediction of intensive care unit patients using an ensemble learning approach.基于集成学习方法的重症监护病房患者早期住院病死率预测。
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Dec;108:185-195. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.10.002. Epub 2017 Oct 5.
4
Is the SAPS II score valid in surgical intensive care unit patients?SAPS II 评分在外科重症监护病房患者中是否有效?
J Eval Clin Pract. 2012 Apr;18(2):231-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01559.x. Epub 2010 Sep 22.
5
[Application of support vector machine in predicting in-hospital mortality risk of patients with acute kidney injury in ICU].支持向量机在预测ICU中急性肾损伤患者院内死亡风险中的应用
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2018 Apr 18;50(2):239-244.
6
Survival prediction in intensive-care units based on aggregation of long-term disease history and acute physiology: a retrospective study of the Danish National Patient Registry and electronic patient records.基于长期疾病史和急性生理学数据聚合的重症监护病房患者生存预测:丹麦国家患者登记处和电子患者记录的回顾性研究。
Lancet Digit Health. 2019 Jun;1(2):e78-e89. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30024-X. Epub 2019 May 23.
7
Performance of three prognostic models in patients with cancer in need of intensive care in a medical center in China.中国某医疗中心中,三种预后模型在需要重症监护的癌症患者中的表现。
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 25;10(6):e0131329. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131329. eCollection 2015.
8
An electronic Simplified Acute Physiology Score-based risk adjustment score for critical illness in an integrated healthcare system.基于电子简化急性生理学评分的综合医疗体系中危重症风险调整评分。
Crit Care Med. 2013 Jan;41(1):41-8. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318267636e.
9
Dynamic and explainable machine learning prediction of mortality in patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective study of high-frequency data in electronic patient records.动态可解释机器学习预测 ICU 患者死亡率:电子患者记录中高频数据的回顾性研究。
Lancet Digit Health. 2020 Apr;2(4):e179-e191. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30018-2. Epub 2020 Mar 12.
10
Predictive Performance of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and the Initial Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score in Acutely Ill Intensive Care Patients: Post-Hoc Analyses of the SUP-ICU Inception Cohort Study.简化急性生理学评分(SAPS)II和初始序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分对急重症监护患者的预测性能:SUP-ICU初始队列研究的事后分析
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 22;11(12):e0168948. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168948. eCollection 2016.

引用本文的文献

1
Interoperable Models for Identifying Critically Ill Children at Risk of Neurologic Morbidity.用于识别有神经疾病风险的危重症儿童的可互操作模型。
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Feb 3;8(2):e2457469. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.57469.
2
Transferability and interpretability of the sepsis prediction models in the intensive care unit.在重症监护病房中,脓毒症预测模型的可转移性和可解释性。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022 Dec 29;22(1):343. doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-02090-3.
3
Use of an electronic medical record to optimize a neonatal sepsis score for mortality prediction.
利用电子病历优化新生儿败血症评分以预测死亡率。
J Perinatol. 2023 Jun;43(6):746-751. doi: 10.1038/s41372-022-01573-5. Epub 2022 Nov 30.
4
Comparative analysis of explainable machine learning prediction models for hospital mortality.可解释机器学习预测模型在医院死亡率预测中的对比分析。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Feb 27;22(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01540-w.
5
Pediatric Simplified Acute Physiology Score II: Establishment of a New, Repeatable Pediatric Mortality Risk Assessment Score.小儿简化急性生理学评分II:一种新的、可重复的小儿死亡风险评估评分的建立。
Front Pediatr. 2021 Oct 28;9:757822. doi: 10.3389/fped.2021.757822. eCollection 2021.
6
Development and Reporting of Prediction Models: Guidance for Authors From Editors of Respiratory, Sleep, and Critical Care Journals.预测模型的制定和报告:呼吸、睡眠和危重病期刊编辑给作者的指南。
Crit Care Med. 2020 May;48(5):623-633. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004246.
7
Development and Performance of Electronic Pediatric Risk of Mortality and Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction-2 Automated Acuity Scores.电子儿童死亡风险和儿科逻辑器官功能障碍-2 自动评估分数的制定和性能。
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2019 Aug;20(8):e372-e379. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000001998.
8
Multitask learning and benchmarking with clinical time series data.多任务学习与临床时间序列数据的基准测试。
Sci Data. 2019 Jun 17;6(1):96. doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0103-9.
9
Informatics Solutions for Application of Decision-Making Skills.决策技能应用的信息学解决方案
Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 2018 Jun;30(2):237-246. doi: 10.1016/j.cnc.2018.02.006. Epub 2018 Apr 4.
10
Clinical Data Reuse or Secondary Use: Current Status and Potential Future Progress.临床数据的再利用或二次使用:现状与未来潜在进展
Yearb Med Inform. 2017 Aug;26(1):38-52. doi: 10.15265/IY-2017-007. Epub 2017 Sep 11.