• 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

用于预测急诊分诊患者脓毒症风险的可解释机器学习

Interpretable machine learning for predicting sepsis risk in emergency triage patients.

作者信息

Liu Zheng, Shu Wenqi, Li Teng, Zhang Xuan, Chong Wei

机构信息

Department of Emergency, The First Hospital of China Medical University, No. 155, Nanjing North Street, Heping District, Shenyang, 11001, China.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 6;15(1):887. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-85121-z.

DOI:10.1038/s41598-025-85121-z
PMID:39762406
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11704257/
Abstract

The study aimed to develop and validate a sepsis prediction model using structured electronic medical records (sEMR) and machine learning (ML) methods in emergency triage. The goal was to enhance early sepsis screening by integrating comprehensive triage information beyond vital signs. This retrospective cohort study utilized data from the MIMIC-IV database. Two models were developed: Model 1 based on vital signs alone, and Model 2 incorporating vital signs, demographic characteristics, medical history, and chief complaints. Eight ML algorithms were employed, and model performance was evaluated using metrics such as AUC, F1 Score, and calibration curves. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME) methods were used to enhance model interpretability. The study included 189,617 patients, with 5.95% diagnosed with sepsis. Model 2 consistently outperformed Model 1 across most algorithms. In Model 2, Gradient Boosting achieved the highest AUC of 0.83, followed by Extra Tree, Random Forest, and Support Vector Machine (all 0.82). The SHAP method provided more comprehensible explanations for the Gradient Boosting algorithm. Modeling with comprehensive triage information using sEMR and ML methods was more effective in predicting sepsis at triage compared to using vital signs alone. Interpretable ML enhanced model transparency and provided sepsis prediction probabilities, offering a feasible approach for early sepsis screening and aiding healthcare professionals in making informed decisions during the triage process.

摘要

该研究旨在利用结构化电子病历(sEMR)和机器学习(ML)方法在急诊分诊中开发并验证一种脓毒症预测模型。目标是通过整合生命体征以外的综合分诊信息来加强早期脓毒症筛查。这项回顾性队列研究使用了MIMIC-IV数据库中的数据。开发了两种模型:模型1仅基于生命体征,模型2纳入了生命体征、人口统计学特征、病史和主要症状。采用了八种ML算法,并使用AUC、F1分数和校准曲线等指标评估模型性能。使用SHapley加法解释(SHAP)和局部可解释模型无关解释(LIME)方法来提高模型的可解释性。该研究纳入了189,617名患者,其中5.95%被诊断为脓毒症。在大多数算法中,模型2始终优于模型1。在模型2中,梯度提升算法的AUC最高,为0.83,其次是极端随机树、随机森林和支持向量机(均为0.82)。SHAP方法为梯度提升算法提供了更易于理解的解释。与仅使用生命体征相比,使用sEMR和ML方法结合综合分诊信息进行建模在预测分诊时的脓毒症方面更有效。可解释的ML提高了模型的透明度,并提供了脓毒症预测概率,为早期脓毒症筛查提供了一种可行的方法,并有助于医疗保健专业人员在分诊过程中做出明智的决策。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/b2470091f14e/41598_2025_85121_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/40f273078402/41598_2025_85121_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/88b1cfd7cb3c/41598_2025_85121_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/deaa784d23bb/41598_2025_85121_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/eb67c9c38ae1/41598_2025_85121_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/b2470091f14e/41598_2025_85121_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/40f273078402/41598_2025_85121_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/88b1cfd7cb3c/41598_2025_85121_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/deaa784d23bb/41598_2025_85121_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/eb67c9c38ae1/41598_2025_85121_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2294/11704257/b2470091f14e/41598_2025_85121_Fig5_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Interpretable machine learning for predicting sepsis risk in emergency triage patients.用于预测急诊分诊患者脓毒症风险的可解释机器学习
Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 6;15(1):887. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-85121-z.
2
Development and validation of interpretable machine learning models for triage patients admitted to the intensive care unit.用于重症监护病房分诊患者的可解释机器学习模型的开发与验证
PLoS One. 2025 Feb 18;20(2):e0317819. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0317819. eCollection 2025.
3
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.
4
Machine learning algorithms for early sepsis detection in the emergency department: A retrospective study.机器学习算法在急诊科早期脓毒症检测中的应用:一项回顾性研究。
Int J Med Inform. 2022 Apr;160:104689. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104689. Epub 2022 Jan 20.
5
Machine learning for prediction of septic shock at initial triage in emergency department.机器学习在急诊科初步分诊中预测感染性休克。
J Crit Care. 2020 Feb;55:163-170. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.09.024. Epub 2019 Oct 22.
6
Prediction of sepsis mortality in ICU patients using machine learning methods.使用机器学习方法预测 ICU 患者的败血症死亡率。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2024 Aug 16;24(1):228. doi: 10.1186/s12911-024-02630-z.
7
Advancing Emergency Department Triage Prediction With Machine Learning to Optimize Triage for Abdominal Pain Surgery Patients.利用机器学习提高急诊科分诊预测能力,优化腹痛手术患者的分诊。
Surg Innov. 2024 Dec;31(6):583-597. doi: 10.1177/15533506241273449. Epub 2024 Aug 16.
8
Development and Validation of an Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Early Prognosis Prediction in ICU Patients with Malignant Tumors and Hyperkalemia.开发和验证一种可解释的机器学习模型,用于预测 ICU 恶性肿瘤合并高钾血症患者的早期预后。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Jul 26;103(30):e38747. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038747.
9
Intelligent diagnosis of Kawasaki disease from real-world data using interpretable machine learning models.使用可解释机器学习模型从真实世界数据中对川崎病进行智能诊断。
Hellenic J Cardiol. 2025 Jan-Feb;81:38-48. doi: 10.1016/j.hjc.2024.08.003. Epub 2024 Aug 10.
10
Interpretable machine learning models for prolonged Emergency Department wait time prediction.用于预测急诊科长时间等待时间的可解释机器学习模型。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 Mar 18;25(1):403. doi: 10.1186/s12913-025-12535-w.

引用本文的文献

1
The Potential of Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Sepsis: A Narrative Review.人工智能在脓毒症诊断和预后评估中的潜力:一项叙述性综述
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 Aug 27;15(17):2169. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15172169.
2
Evaluating the impact of common clinical confounders on performance of deep-learning-based sepsis risk assessment.评估常见临床混杂因素对基于深度学习的脓毒症风险评估性能的影响。
Front Artif Intell. 2025 Jul 15;8:1452471. doi: 10.3389/frai.2025.1452471. eCollection 2025.
3
The ethics of data mining in healthcare: challenges, frameworks, and future directions.

本文引用的文献

1
A comparative study of explainable ensemble learning and logistic regression for predicting in-hospital mortality in the emergency department.一种用于预测急诊科住院死亡率的可解释集成学习与逻辑回归的对比研究。
Sci Rep. 2024 Feb 10;14(1):3406. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-54038-4.
2
The enlightening role of explainable artificial intelligence in medical & healthcare domains: A systematic literature review.可解释人工智能在医疗保健领域中的启示作用:系统文献综述。
Comput Biol Med. 2023 Nov;166:107555. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2023.107555. Epub 2023 Oct 4.
3
Development and validation of predictive models for unplanned hospitalization in the Basque Country: analyzing the variability of non-deterministic algorithms.
医疗保健领域数据挖掘的伦理问题:挑战、框架及未来方向。
BioData Min. 2025 Jul 11;18(1):47. doi: 10.1186/s13040-025-00461-w.
4
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.
预测模型在巴斯克地区非计划性住院的开发和验证:分析非确定性算法的可变性。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023 Aug 5;23(1):152. doi: 10.1186/s12911-023-02226-z.
4
Methodologic Issues Specific to Prediction Model Development and Evaluation.专门针对预测模型开发和评估的方法学问题。
Chest. 2023 Nov;164(5):1281-1289. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2023.06.038. Epub 2023 Jul 4.
5
Comparison of Six Scoring Systems for Predicting In-hospital Mortality among Patients with SARS-COV2 Presenting to the Emergency Department.六种预测急诊科收治的2019冠状病毒病患者院内死亡率评分系统的比较
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2023 Jun;27(6):416-425. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24463.
6
Comparing In-Hospital Mortality Prediction by Senior Emergency Resident's Judgment and Prognostic Models in the Emergency Department.比较急诊科资深住院医师判断和预后模型对住院患者死亡率的预测。
Biomed Res Int. 2023 May 15;2023:6042762. doi: 10.1155/2023/6042762. eCollection 2023.
7
Artificial intelligence and machine learning in emergency medicine: a narrative review.急诊医学中的人工智能与机器学习:一篇叙述性综述
Acute Med Surg. 2022 Mar 1;9(1):e740. doi: 10.1002/ams2.740. eCollection 2022 Jan-Dec.
8
Risk factors of sepsis among patients with qSOFA<2 in the emergency department.急诊 qSOFA<2 的患者发生脓毒症的危险因素。
Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Dec;50:699-706. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.09.035. Epub 2021 Sep 27.
9
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021.拯救脓毒症运动:2021年脓毒症和脓毒性休克国际管理指南
Crit Care Med. 2021 Nov 1;49(11):e1063-e1143. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005337.
10
Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021.拯救脓毒症运动:2021年脓毒症和脓毒性休克国际管理指南
Intensive Care Med. 2021 Nov;47(11):1181-1247. doi: 10.1007/s00134-021-06506-y. Epub 2021 Oct 2.