ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Machine and Deep Learning Models for Hypoxemia Severity Triage in CBRNE Emergencies.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced classification and identification of bacterial and viral microorganisms by integration of MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry with artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Mapping artificial intelligence models in emergency medicine: A scoping review on artificial intelligence performance in emergency care and education.Turkish journal of emergency medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study develops machine learning (ML) models to predict hypoxemia severity during emergency triage, particularly in Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) scenarios, using physiological data from medical-grade sensors.
methodsTree-based models (TBMs) such as XGBoost, LightGBM, CatBoost, Random Forests (RFs), Voting Classifier ensembles, and sequential models (LSTM, GRU) were trained on the MIMIC-III and IV datasets. A preprocessing pipeline addressed missing data, class imbalances, and synthetic data flagged with masks. Models were evaluated using a 5-min prediction window with minute-level interpolations for timely interventions.
resultsTBMs outperformed sequential models in speed, interpretability, and reliability, making them better suited for real-time decision-making. Feature importance analysis identified six key physiological variables from the enhanced NEWS2+ score and emphasized the value of mask and score features for transparency. Voting Classifier ensembles showed slight metric gains but did not outperform individually optimized models, facing a precision-sensitivity tradeoff and slightly lower F1-scores for key severity levels.
conclusionsTBMs were effective for real-time hypoxemia prediction, while sequential models, though better at temporal handling, were computationally costly. This study highlights ML's potential to improve triage systems and reduce alarm fatigue, with future plans to incorporate multi-hospital datasets for broader applicability.
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.