ArticleJAMIA open2024
Development, deployment, and continuous monitoring of a machine learning model to predict respiratory failure in critically ill patients.
Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physician Gestalt Compared With Artificial Intelligence Model to Predict Intubation in Critically Ill Patients.Critical care explorations · 2026Observational
- Understanding the Risks and Benefits of Implementing AI-Enabled Remote Patient Monitoring Systems for Disease Management.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Enhancing predictive modeling for respiratory support with LLM-driven guideline adherence.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Comparing high-flow nasal cannula and non-invasive ventilation in critical care: insights from deep counterfactual inference.npj health systems · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: This study describes the development and deployment of a machine learning (ML) model called Vent.io to predict mechanical ventilation (MV). Materials and Methods: We trained Vent.io using electronic health record data of adult patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of the University of California San Diego (UCSD) Health System. We prospectively deployed Vent.io using a real-time platform at UCSD and evaluated the performance of Vent.io for a 1-month period in silent mode and on the MIMIC-IV dataset. As part of deployment, we included a Predetermined Changed Control Plan (PCCP) for continuous model monitoring that triggers model fine-tuning if performance drops below a specified area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) threshold of 0.85. Results: The Vent.io model had a median AUC of 0.897 (IQR: 0.892-0.904) with specificity of 0.81 (IQR: 0.812-0.841) and positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.174 (IQR: 0.148-0.176) at a fixed sensitivity of 0.6 during 10-fold cross validation and an AUC of 0.908, sensitivity of 0.632, specificity of 0.849, and PPV of 0.235 during prospective deployment. Vent.io had an AUC of 0.73 on the MIMIC-IV dataset, triggering model fine-tuning per the PCCP as the AUC was below the minimum of 0.85. The fine-tuned Vent.io model achieved an AUC of 0.873. Discussion: Deterioration of model performance is a significant challenge when deploying ML models prospectively or at different sites. Implementation of a PCCP can help models adapt to new patterns in data and maintain generalizability. Conclusion: Vent.io is a generalizable ML model that has the potential to improve patient care and resource allocation for ICU patients with need for MV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.