Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37177659›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Machine Learning for Postoperative Continuous Recovery Scores of Oncology Patients in Perioperative Care with Data from Wearables.

Meike A C van den Eijnden, Jonna A van der Stam, R Arthur Bouwman, Eveline H J Mestrom, Wim F J Verhaegh, Natal A W van Riel, Lieke G E Cox

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Improving Early Prediction of Abnormal Recovery after Appendectomy in Children using Real-world Data from Wearables.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

7 authors.

Meike A C van den EijndenPhilips Research, 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Jonna A van der StamDepartment Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5612 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6195-7303
R Arthur BouwmanDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Catharina Hospital, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2051-5947
Eveline H J MestromDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Catharina Hospital, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Wim F J VerhaeghPhilips Research, 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8088-9924
Natal A W van RielDepartment Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5612 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9375-4730
Lieke G E CoxPhilips Research, 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessing post-operative recovery is a significant component of perioperative care, since this assessment might facilitate detecting complications and determining an appropriate discharge date. However, recovery is difficult to assess and challenging to predict, as no universally accepted definition exists. Current solutions often contain a high level of subjectivity, measure recovery only at one moment in time, and only investigate recovery until the discharge moment. For these reasons, this research aims to create a model that predicts continuous recovery scores in perioperative care in the hospital and at home for objective decision making. This regression model utilized vital signs and activity metrics measured using wearable sensors and the XGBoost algorithm for training. The proposed model described continuous recovery profiles, obtained a high predictive performance, and provided outcomes that are interpretable due to the low number of features in the final model. Moreover, activity features, the circadian rhythm of the heart, and heart rate recovery showed the highest feature importance in the recovery model. Patients could be identified with fast and slow recovery trajectories by comparing patient-specific predicted profiles to the average fast- and slow-recovering populations. This identification may facilitate determining appropriate discharge dates, detecting complications, preventing readmission, and planning physical therapy. Hence, the model can provide an automatic and objective decision support tool.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsWearable Electronic DevicesAlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningPerioperative Careclinical predictionhospital dischargemachine learningmonitoringoncologyphysical activitypost-operative recoveryvital signswearable sensors

Identifiers

PMID37177659
PMCPMC10181524

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.