Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35835943›Full record

ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2022

Explainable Machine-Learning Model for Prediction of In-Hospital Mortality in Septic Patients Requiring Intensive Care Unit Readmission.

Chang Hu, Lu Li, Yiming Li, Fengyun Wang, Bo Hu, Zhiyong Peng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Chang Hu *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Lu Li *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Yiming Li *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Fengyun WangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Bo HuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China. hobbier1979@163.com.
Zhiyong PengDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China. zn001590@whu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81772046National Natural Science Foundation of China 81971816Special Project for Significant New Drug Research and Development in the Major National Science and Technology Projects of China 2020ZX09201007Subject Cultivation Project of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University ZNXKPY2021001Subject Cultivation Project of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University ZNXKPY2021002the Open Project Program of the Jiangsu Provincial Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine JSKLCCM-2021-02-003Translational Medicine and Interdisciplinary Research Joint Fund of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University ZNJC202011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSeptic patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) readmission are at high risk of mortality, but research focusing on the association of ICU readmission due to sepsis and mortality is limited. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a machine learning (ML) model for predicting in-hospital mortality in septic patients readmitted to the ICU using routinely available clinical data.

methodsThe data used in this study were obtained from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-IV, v1.0) database, between 2008 and 2019. The study cohort included patients with sepsis requiring ICU readmission. The data were randomly split into a training (75%) data set and a validation (25%) data set. Nine popular ML models were developed to predict mortality in septic patients readmitted to the ICU. The model with the best accuracy and area under the curve (A.C.) in the validation cohort was defined as the optimal model and was selected for further prediction studies. The SHAPELY Additive explanations (SHAP) values and Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanation (LIME) methods were used to improve the interpretability of the optimal model.

resultsA total of 1117 septic patients who had required ICU readmission during the study period were enrolled in the study. Of these participants, 434 (38.9%) were female, and the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 68.6 (58.4-79.2) years. The median (IQR) ICU interval duration was 2.60 (0.64-5.78) days. After feature selection, 31 of 47 clinical factors were ultimately chosen for use in model construction. Of the nine ML models tested, the best performance was achieved with the random forest (RF) model, with an A.C. of 0.81, an accuracy of 85% and a precision of 62% in the validation cohort. The SHAP summary analysis revealed that Glasgow Coma Scale score, urine output, blood urea nitrogen, lactate, platelet count and systolic blood pressure were the top six most important factors contributing to the RF model. Additionally, the LIME method demonstrated how the RF model works in terms of explaining risk of death prediction in septic patients requiring ICU readmission.

conclusionThe ML models reported here showed a good prognostic prediction ability in septic patients requiring ICU readmission. Of the features selected, the parameters related to organ perfusion made the largest contribution to outcome prediction during ICU readmission in septic patients.

Indexed as

Explainable artificial intelligenceMachine learningMortalityRandom ForestSepsis

Identifiers

PMID35835943
PMCPMC9282631

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.