• 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

重症创伤患者脓毒症的实时预测:基于机器学习的建模研究

Real-Time Prediction of Sepsis in Critical Trauma Patients: Machine Learning-Based Modeling Study.

作者信息

Li Jiang, Xi Fengchan, Yu Wenkui, Sun Chuanrui, Wang Xiling

机构信息

School of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Public Health Safety, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

Research Institute of General Surgery, Affiliated Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.

出版信息

JMIR Form Res. 2023 Mar 31;7:e42452. doi: 10.2196/42452.

DOI:10.2196/42452
PMID:37000488
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10131736/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a leading cause of death in patients with trauma, and the risk of mortality increases significantly for each hour of delay in treatment. A hypermetabolic baseline and explosive inflammatory immune response mask clinical signs and symptoms of sepsis in trauma patients, making early diagnosis of sepsis more challenging. Machine learning-based predictive modeling has shown great promise in evaluating and predicting sepsis risk in the general intensive care unit (ICU) setting, but there has been no sepsis prediction model specifically developed for trauma patients so far.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a machine learning model to predict the risk of sepsis at an hourly scale among ICU-admitted trauma patients.

METHODS

We extracted data from adult trauma patients admitted to the ICU at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between 2008 and 2019. A total of 42 raw variables were collected, including demographics, vital signs, arterial blood gas, and laboratory tests. We further derived a total of 485 features, including measurement pattern features, scoring features, and time-series variables, from the raw variables by feature engineering. The data set was randomly split into 70% for model development with stratified 5-fold cross-validation, 15% for calibration, and 15% for testing. An Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model was developed to predict the hourly risk of sepsis at prediction windows of 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours. We evaluated model performance for discrimination and calibration both at time-step and outcome levels. Clinical applicability of the model was evaluated with varying levels of precision, and the potential clinical net benefit was assessed with decision curve analysis (DCA). A Shapley additive explanation algorithm was applied to show the effect of features on the prediction model. In addition, we trained an L2-regularized logistic regression model to compare its performance with XGBoost.

RESULTS

We included 4603 trauma patients in the study, 1196 (26%) of whom developed sepsis. The XGBoost model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 at the 4-to-24-hour prediction window in the test set. With a ratio of 9 false alerts for every true alert, it predicted 73% (386/529) of sepsis-positive timesteps and 91% (163/179) of sepsis events in the subsequent 6 hours. The DCA showed our model had a positive net benefit in the threshold probability range of 0 to 0.6. In comparison, the logistic regression model achieved lower performance, with AUROC ranging from 0.76 to 0.84 at the 4-to-24-hour prediction window.

CONCLUSIONS

The machine learning-based model had good discrimination and calibration performance for sepsis prediction in critical trauma patients. Using the model in clinical practice might help to identify patients at risk of sepsis in a time window that enables personalized intervention and early treatment.

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/d19316cd98f3/formative_v7i1e42452_fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/ad25df46eb81/formative_v7i1e42452_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/5e836829da55/formative_v7i1e42452_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/879e2285045d/formative_v7i1e42452_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/d19316cd98f3/formative_v7i1e42452_fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/ad25df46eb81/formative_v7i1e42452_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/5e836829da55/formative_v7i1e42452_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/879e2285045d/formative_v7i1e42452_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0887/10131736/d19316cd98f3/formative_v7i1e42452_fig4.jpg
摘要

背景

脓毒症是创伤患者死亡的主要原因,治疗每延迟一小时,死亡风险就会显著增加。高代谢基线和爆发性炎症免疫反应掩盖了创伤患者脓毒症的临床体征和症状,使得脓毒症的早期诊断更具挑战性。基于机器学习的预测模型在评估和预测普通重症监护病房(ICU)环境中的脓毒症风险方面显示出巨大潜力,但到目前为止,尚未有专门为创伤患者开发的脓毒症预测模型。

目的

开发一种机器学习模型,以小时为尺度预测入住ICU的创伤患者发生脓毒症的风险。

方法

我们从2008年至2019年期间入住贝斯以色列女执事医疗中心ICU的成年创伤患者中提取数据。总共收集了42个原始变量,包括人口统计学、生命体征、动脉血气和实验室检查。通过特征工程,我们从原始变量中进一步衍生出总共485个特征,包括测量模式特征、评分特征和时间序列变量。数据集被随机分为70%用于模型开发,并进行分层5折交叉验证,15%用于校准,15%用于测试。开发了一种极端梯度提升(XGBoost)模型,以预测4、6、8、12和24小时预测窗口下脓毒症的每小时风险。我们在时间步长和结果水平上评估了模型的判别和校准性能。使用不同精度水平评估模型的临床适用性,并通过决策曲线分析(DCA)评估潜在的临床净效益。应用Shapley加法解释算法来显示特征对预测模型的影响。此外,我们训练了一个L2正则化逻辑回归模型,以将其性能与XGBoost进行比较。

结果

我们在研究中纳入了4603名创伤患者,其中1196名(26%)发生了脓毒症。在测试集中,XGBoost模型在4至24小时预测窗口下的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)范围为0.83至0.88。每出现9次假警报对应1次真警报,它预测了73%(386/529)的脓毒症阳性时间步长以及随后6小时内91%(163/179)的脓毒症事件。DCA显示我们的模型在阈值概率范围为0至0.6时具有正净效益。相比之下,逻辑回归模型的性能较低,在4至24小时预测窗口下的AUROC范围为0.76至0.84。

结论

基于机器学习的模型在预测重症创伤患者的脓毒症方面具有良好的判别和校准性能。在临床实践中使用该模型可能有助于在一个能够实现个性化干预和早期治疗的时间窗口内识别有脓毒症风险的患者。

相似文献

1
Real-Time Prediction of Sepsis in Critical Trauma Patients: Machine Learning-Based Modeling Study.重症创伤患者脓毒症的实时预测:基于机器学习的建模研究
JMIR Form Res. 2023 Mar 31;7:e42452. doi: 10.2196/42452.
2
Illness severity assessment of older adults in critical illness using machine learning (ELDER-ICU): an international multicentre study with subgroup bias evaluation.使用机器学习评估危重症老年患者的疾病严重程度(ELDER-ICU):一项具有亚组偏倚评估的国际多中心研究。
Lancet Digit Health. 2023 Oct;5(10):e657-e667. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00128-0. Epub 2023 Aug 18.
3
An explainable machine learning-based model to predict intensive care unit admission among patients with community-acquired pneumonia and connective tissue disease.基于可解释机器学习的模型,用于预测社区获得性肺炎和结缔组织病患者入住重症监护病房的情况。
Respir Res. 2024 Jun 18;25(1):246. doi: 10.1186/s12931-024-02874-3.
4
Interpretable machine learning model for early prediction of 28-day mortality in ICU patients with sepsis-induced coagulopathy: development and validation.用于脓毒症诱导性凝血病 ICU 患者 28 天死亡率早期预测的可解释机器学习模型:开发与验证。
Eur J Med Res. 2024 Jan 3;29(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s40001-023-01593-7.
5
Evaluate prognostic accuracy of SOFA component score for mortality among adults with sepsis by machine learning method.采用机器学习方法评估 SOFA 评分对脓毒症成人死亡率的预后准确性。
BMC Infect Dis. 2023 Feb 6;23(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s12879-023-08045-x.
6
[Prediction of intensive care unit readmission for critically ill patients based on ensemble learning].基于集成学习的危重症患者重症监护病房再入院预测
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2021 Jun 18;53(3):566-572. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2021.03.021.
7
Prediction model of in-hospital mortality in intensive care unit patients with cardiac arrest: a retrospective analysis of MIMIC -IV database based on machine learning.基于机器学习的 MIMIC-IV 数据库中 ICU 心搏骤停患者院内死亡率预测模型:回顾性分析。
BMC Anesthesiol. 2023 May 25;23(1):178. doi: 10.1186/s12871-023-02138-5.
8
Machine learning-based in-hospital mortality risk prediction tool for intensive care unit patients with heart failure.基于机器学习的心力衰竭重症监护病房患者院内死亡风险预测工具。
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Apr 3;10:1119699. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1119699. eCollection 2023.
9
Machine-learning-derived online prediction models of outcomes for patients with cholelithiasis-induced acute cholangitis: development and validation in two retrospective cohorts.基于机器学习的胆石症所致急性胆管炎患者预后在线预测模型:在两个回顾性队列中的开发与验证
EClinicalMedicine. 2024 Sep 5;76:102820. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102820. eCollection 2024 Oct.
10
Using machine learning methods to predict in-hospital mortality of sepsis patients in the ICU.使用机器学习方法预测 ICU 中脓毒症患者的院内死亡率。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Oct 2;20(1):251. doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01271-2.

引用本文的文献

1
Bug Wars: Artificial Intelligence Strikes Back in Sepsis Management.细菌大战:人工智能在脓毒症管理中卷土重来
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 Jul 28;15(15):1890. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15151890.
2
Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models for Early Sepsis Prediction: A Scoping Review.用于早期脓毒症预测的机器学习和深度学习模型:一项范围综述
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2025 Jun;29(6):516-524. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24986. Epub 2025 Jun 5.
3
ASSESSMENT OF EARLY INDICATORS FOR SEPSIS DEVELOPMENT IN MULTIPLE TRAUMA PATIENTS-THE SEPSIS AS TRAUMA OUTCOME PREDICTION (STOP) SCORE.

本文引用的文献

1
MIMIC-IV, a freely accessible electronic health record dataset.MIMIC-IV,一个可自由访问的电子健康记录数据集。
Sci Data. 2023 Jan 3;10(1):1. doi: 10.1038/s41597-022-01899-x.
2
Early Prediction of Sepsis Onset Using Neural Architecture Search Based on Genetic Algorithms.基于遗传算法的神经网络架构搜索在脓毒症发病早期预测中的应用。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 18;19(4):2349. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19042349.
3
Evaluating machine learning models for sepsis prediction: A systematic review of methodologies.评估用于脓毒症预测的机器学习模型:方法学的系统综述
评估多发伤患者脓毒症发生的早期指标——脓毒症作为创伤结局预测(STOP)评分
Shock. 2025 Aug 1;64(2):187-197. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000002626. Epub 2025 May 14.
4
Identifying early predictive and diagnostic biomarkers and exploring metabolic pathways for sepsis after trauma based on an untargeted metabolomics approach.基于非靶向代谢组学方法识别创伤后脓毒症的早期预测和诊断生物标志物并探索代谢途径。
Sci Rep. 2025 Apr 8;15(1):12068. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-92631-3.
5
Nuclear magnetic resonance-based metabolomics with machine learning for predicting progression from prediabetes to diabetes.基于磁共振的代谢组学与机器学习预测从糖尿病前期到糖尿病的进展。
Elife. 2024 Sep 20;13:RP98709. doi: 10.7554/eLife.98709.
6
Prediction of sepsis among patients with major trauma using artificial intelligence: a multicenter validated cohort study.使用人工智能预测重大创伤患者的脓毒症:一项多中心验证队列研究
Int J Surg. 2025 Jan 1;111(1):467-480. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001866.
7
Advanced hybrid LSTM-transformer architecture for real-time multi-task prediction in engineering systems.用于工程系统实时多任务预测的先进混合长短期记忆网络-Transformer架构
Sci Rep. 2024 Feb 28;14(1):4890. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-55483-x.
8
Development and validation of a machine learning model integrated with the clinical workflow for early detection of sepsis.一种与临床工作流程相结合用于早期检测脓毒症的机器学习模型的开发与验证。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Nov 23;10:1284081. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1284081. eCollection 2023.
iScience. 2021 Dec 20;25(1):103651. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.103651. eCollection 2022 Jan 21.
4
The Framing of machine learning risk prediction models illustrated by evaluation of sepsis in general wards.通过普通病房中脓毒症的评估阐述机器学习风险预测模型的构建。
NPJ Digit Med. 2021 Nov 15;4(1):158. doi: 10.1038/s41746-021-00529-x.
5
Early Prediction of Sepsis Based on Machine Learning Algorithm.基于机器学习算法的脓毒症早期预测。
Comput Intell Neurosci. 2021 Oct 12;2021:6522633. doi: 10.1155/2021/6522633. eCollection 2021.
6
Impact of Obesity in Critical Illness.肥胖对危重症的影响。
Chest. 2021 Dec;160(6):2135-2145. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2021.08.001. Epub 2021 Aug 5.
7
External Validation of a Widely Implemented Proprietary Sepsis Prediction Model in Hospitalized Patients.在住院患者中验证广泛实施的专有脓毒症预测模型的外部有效性。
JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Aug 1;181(8):1065-1070. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.2626.
8
Early Prediction of Sepsis in the ICU Using Machine Learning: A Systematic Review.使用机器学习对重症监护病房中的脓毒症进行早期预测:一项系统综述。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 May 28;8:607952. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.607952. eCollection 2021.
9
Physiological machine learning models for prediction of sepsis in hospitalized adults: An integrative review.生理机器学习模型在预测住院成人脓毒症中的应用:综合评价。
Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2021 Aug;65:103035. doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2021.103035. Epub 2021 Apr 17.
10
Older Adults Demonstrate Biomarker Evidence of the Persistent Inflammation, Immunosuppression, and Catabolism Syndrome (PICS) After Sepsis.老年人在脓毒症后表现出持续性炎症、免疫抑制和分解代谢综合征(PICS)的生物标志物证据。
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2022 Jan 7;77(1):188-196. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glab080.