• 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

利用机器学习预测病房转移死亡率。

Predicting ward transfer mortality with machine learning.

作者信息

Lezama Jose L, Alterovitz Gil, Jakey Colleen E, Kraus Ana L, Kim Michael J, Borkowski Andrew A

机构信息

James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Tampa, FL, United States.

Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, USF Health, Tampa, FL, United States.

出版信息

Front Artif Intell. 2023 Aug 2;6:1191320. doi: 10.3389/frai.2023.1191320. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.3389/frai.2023.1191320
PMID:37601037
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10433377/
Abstract

In order to address a long standing challenge for internal medicine physicians we developed artificial intelligence (AI) models to identify patients at risk of increased mortality. After querying 2,425 records of patients transferred from non-intensive care units to intensive care units from the Veteran Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW), we created two datasets. The former used 22 independent variables that included "Length of Hospital Stay" and "Days to Intensive Care Transfer," and the latter lacked these two variables. Since these two variables are unknown at the time of admission, the second set is more clinically relevant. We trained 16 machine learning models using both datasets. The best-performing models were fine-tuned and evaluated. The LightGBM model achieved the best results for both datasets. The model trained with 22 variables achieved a Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve-Area Under the Curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.89 and an accuracy of 0.72, with a sensitivity of 0.97 and a specificity of 0.68. The model trained with 20 variables achieved a ROC-AUC of 0.86 and an accuracy of 0.71, with a sensitivity of 0.94 and a specificity of 0.67. The top features for the former model included "Total length of Stay," "Admit to ICU Transfer Days," and "Lymphocyte Next Lab Value." For the latter model, the top features included "Lymphocyte First Lab Value," "Hemoglobin First Lab Value," and "Hemoglobin Next Lab Value." Our clinically relevant predictive mortality model can assist providers in optimizing resource utilization when managing large caseloads, particularly during shift changes.

摘要

为应对内科医生长期面临的一项挑战,我们开发了人工智能(AI)模型来识别死亡风险增加的患者。在查询了退伍军人事务部企业数据仓库(CDW)中从非重症监护病房转入重症监护病房的2425例患者的记录后,我们创建了两个数据集。前者使用了22个独立变量,包括“住院时间”和“转入重症监护病房的天数”,后者则缺少这两个变量。由于这两个变量在入院时是未知的,所以第二组数据集在临床上更具相关性。我们使用这两个数据集训练了16个机器学习模型。对表现最佳的模型进行了微调并评估。LightGBM模型在两个数据集上均取得了最佳结果。使用22个变量训练的模型的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(ROC-AUC)为0.89,准确率为0.72,灵敏度为0.97,特异度为0.68。使用20个变量训练的模型的ROC-AUC为0.86,准确率为0.71,灵敏度为0.94,特异度为0.67。前一个模型的顶级特征包括“总住院时间”“入院至转入重症监护病房的天数”和“下一次实验室检查的淋巴细胞值”。后一个模型的顶级特征包括“首次实验室检查的淋巴细胞值”“首次实验室检查的血红蛋白值”和“下一次实验室检查的血红蛋白值”。我们具有临床相关性的预测死亡率模型可以帮助医疗服务提供者在管理大量病例时优化资源利用,尤其是在轮班期间。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d187/10433377/143fe6a66ee0/frai-06-1191320-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d187/10433377/143fe6a66ee0/frai-06-1191320-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d187/10433377/143fe6a66ee0/frai-06-1191320-g0001.jpg

相似文献

1
Predicting ward transfer mortality with machine learning.利用机器学习预测病房转移死亡率。
Front Artif Intell. 2023 Aug 2;6:1191320. doi: 10.3389/frai.2023.1191320. eCollection 2023.
2
ICURE: Intensive care unit (ICU) risk evaluation for 30-day mortality. Developing and evaluating a multivariable machine learning prediction model for patients admitted to the general ICU in Sweden.ICURE:30 天死亡率的重症监护病房(ICU)风险评估。在瑞典,针对普通 ICU 收治的患者,开发和评估一个多变量机器学习预测模型。
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2024 Nov;68(10):1379-1389. doi: 10.1111/aas.14501. Epub 2024 Jul 21.
3
[Constructing a predictive model for the death risk of patients with septic shock based on supervised machine learning algorithms].基于监督机器学习算法构建脓毒症休克患者死亡风险预测模型
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2024 Apr;36(4):345-352. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20230930-00832.
4
Predicting Intensive Care Unit Readmission with Machine Learning Using Electronic Health Record Data.使用电子健康记录数据进行机器学习预测重症监护病房再入院。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2018 Jul;15(7):846-853. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201710-787OC.
5
Hospital Length of Stay and 30-Day Mortality Prediction in Stroke: A Machine Learning Analysis of 17,000 ICU Admissions in Brazil.医院住院时间和 30 天死亡率预测:巴西 17000 例 ICU 入院患者的机器学习分析。
Neurocrit Care. 2022 Aug;37(Suppl 2):313-321. doi: 10.1007/s12028-022-01486-3. Epub 2022 Apr 6.
6
Assessing optimal methods for transferring machine learning models to low-volume and imbalanced clinical datasets: experiences from predicting outcomes of Danish trauma patients.评估将机器学习模型应用于小样本和不均衡临床数据集的最佳方法:丹麦创伤患者预后预测的经验
Front Digit Health. 2023 Nov 2;5:1249258. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1249258. eCollection 2023.
7
[Construction of a predictive model for in-hospital mortality of sepsis patients in intensive care unit based on machine learning].基于机器学习构建重症监护病房脓毒症患者院内死亡率预测模型
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2023 Jul;35(7):696-701. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20221219-01104.
8
Learning From Past Respiratory Infections to Predict COVID-19 Outcomes: Retrospective Study.从既往呼吸道感染预测 COVID-19 结局:回顾性研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Feb 22;23(2):e23026. doi: 10.2196/23026.
9
[Establishment of an early risk prediction model for bloodstream infection and analysis of its predictive value in patients with extremely severe burns].[建立血流感染早期风险预测模型并分析其在特重度烧伤患者中的预测价值]
Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi. 2021 Jun 20;37(6):530-537. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20210114-00021.
10
Machine learning combining CT findings and clinical parameters improves prediction of length of stay and ICU admission in torso trauma.机器学习结合 CT 表现和临床参数可提高对胸腹部创伤患者住院时间和 ICU 入住的预测。
Eur Radiol. 2021 Jul;31(7):5434-5441. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07534-w. Epub 2021 Jan 21.

本文引用的文献

1
Generalizability of an acute kidney injury prediction model across health systems.急性肾损伤预测模型在不同卫生系统中的可推广性。
Nat Mach Intell. 2022 Dec;4(12):1121-1129. doi: 10.1038/s42256-022-00563-8. Epub 2022 Dec 1.
2
Prospective, multi-site study of patient outcomes after implementation of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system for sepsis.采用 TREWS 机器学习为基础的脓毒症早期预警系统后,对患者预后的前瞻性、多中心研究。
Nat Med. 2022 Jul;28(7):1455-1460. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-01894-0. Epub 2022 Jul 21.
3
Development and External Validation of a Machine Learning Model for Prediction of Potential Transfer to the PICU.
开发和外部验证一种用于预测潜在转入 PICU 的机器学习模型。
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2022 Jul 1;23(7):514-523. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002965. Epub 2022 Apr 21.
4
Sepsis prediction, early detection, and identification using clinical text for machine learning: a systematic review.使用临床文本进行机器学习的脓毒症预测、早期检测和识别:系统评价。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022 Jan 29;29(3):559-575. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocab236.
5
Analysis of absolute lymphocyte count in patients with COVID-19.分析 COVID-19 患者的绝对淋巴细胞计数。
Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Aug;46:16-19. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.02.054. Epub 2021 Mar 2.
6
Early warning scores and critical care transfer - patient heterogeneity, low sensitivity, high mortality.早期预警评分与重症监护转运——患者异质性、低敏感性、高死亡率。
Ir J Med Sci. 2022 Feb;191(1):119-126. doi: 10.1007/s11845-021-02558-7. Epub 2021 Mar 10.
7
Potential Biases in Machine Learning Algorithms Using Electronic Health Record Data.利用电子健康记录数据的机器学习算法中的潜在偏差。
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Nov 1;178(11):1544-1547. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3763.
8
Epidemiology and Costs of Sepsis in the United States-An Analysis Based on Timing of Diagnosis and Severity Level.美国脓毒症的流行病学和成本:基于诊断时间和严重程度级别的分析。
Crit Care Med. 2018 Dec;46(12):1889-1897. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003342.
9
A community approach to mortality prediction in sepsis via gene expression analysis.通过基因表达分析实现脓毒症死亡率预测的社区方法。
Nat Commun. 2018 Feb 15;9(1):694. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-03078-2.
10
The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them.认知错误在诊断中的重要性以及将其最小化的策略。
Acad Med. 2003 Aug;78(8):775-80. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200308000-00003.