Literature DB >> 27707820

Understanding vasopressor intervention and weaning: risk prediction in a public heterogeneous clinical time series database.

Mike Wu1, Marzyeh Ghassemi2, Mengling Feng2, Leo A Celi2, Peter Szolovits2, Finale Doshi-Velez3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The widespread adoption of electronic health records allows us to ask evidence-based questions about the need for and benefits of specific clinical interventions in critical-care settings across large populations.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the prediction of vasopressor administration and weaning in the intensive care unit. Vasopressors are commonly used to control hypotension, and changes in timing and dosage can have a large impact on patient outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We considered a cohort of 15 695 intensive care unit patients without orders for reduced care who were alive 30 days post-discharge. A switching-state autoregressive model (SSAM) was trained to predict the multidimensional physiological time series of patients before, during, and after vasopressor administration. The latent states from the SSAM were used as predictors of vasopressor administration and weaning.
RESULTS: The unsupervised SSAM features were able to predict patient vasopressor administration and successful patient weaning. Features derived from the SSAM achieved areas under the receiver operating curve of 0.92, 0.88, and 0.71 for predicting ungapped vasopressor administration, gapped vasopressor administration, and vasopressor weaning, respectively. We also demonstrated many cases where our model predicted weaning well in advance of a successful wean.
CONCLUSION: Models that used SSAM features increased performance on both predictive tasks. These improvements may reflect an underlying, and ultimately predictive, latent state detectable from the physiological time series.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Entities:  

Keywords:  autoregressive models; electronic health records; latent variable models; risk prediction

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27707820      PMCID: PMC6455107          DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocw138

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  24 in total

1.  Missing covariate data in medical research: to impute is better than to ignore.

Authors:  Kristel J M Janssen; A Rogier T Donders; Frank E Harrell; Yvonne Vergouwe; Qingxia Chen; Diederick E Grobbee; Karel G M Moons
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 2.  Multicenter, randomized, controlled trials evaluating mortality in intensive care: doomed to fail?

Authors:  Gustavo A Ospina-Tascón; Gustavo Luiz Büchele; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 7.598

3.  The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.

Authors:  J L Vincent; R Moreno; J Takala; S Willatts; A De Mendonça; H Bruining; C K Reinhart; P M Suter; L G Thijs
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Prognostic physiology: modeling patient severity in Intensive Care Units using radial domain folding.

Authors:  Rohit Joshi; Peter Szolovits
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2012-11-03

5.  A simplified acute physiology score for ICU patients.

Authors:  J R Le Gall; P Loirat; A Alperovitch; P Glaser; C Granthil; D Mathieu; P Mercier; R Thomas; D Villers
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 7.598

6.  Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock.

Authors:  Daniel De Backer; Patrick Biston; Jacques Devriendt; Christian Madl; Didier Chochrad; Cesar Aldecoa; Alexandre Brasseur; Pierre Defrance; Philippe Gottignies; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-03-04       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Unfolding Physiological State: Mortality Modelling in Intensive Care Units.

Authors:  Marzyeh Ghassemi; Tristan Naumann; Finale Doshi-Velez; Nicole Brimmer; Rohit Joshi; Anna Rumshisky; Peter Szolovits
Journal:  KDD       Date:  2014-08-24

8.  Computational phenotype discovery using unsupervised feature learning over noisy, sparse, and irregular clinical data.

Authors:  Thomas A Lasko; Joshua C Denny; Mia A Levy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Risk prediction for chronic kidney disease progression using heterogeneous electronic health record data and time series analysis.

Authors:  Adler Perotte; Rajesh Ranganath; Jamie S Hirsch; David Blei; Noémie Elhadad
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-04-20       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 10.  Critical care--where have we been and where are we going?

Authors:  Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  11 in total

1.  Predicting Volume Responsiveness Among Sepsis Patients Using Clinical Data and Continuous Physiological Waveforms.

Authors:  Rishikesan Kamaleswaran; Jiaoying Lian; Dong-Lien Lin; Himasagar Molakapuri; SriManikanth Nunna; Parth Shah; Shiv Dua; Rema Padman
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2021-01-25

Review 2.  Vasopressor therapy in critically ill patients with shock.

Authors:  James A Russell
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  A Review of Challenges and Opportunities in Machine Learning for Health.

Authors:  Marzyeh Ghassemi; Tristan Naumann; Peter Schulam; Andrew L Beam; Irene Y Chen; Rajesh Ranganath
Journal:  AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc       Date:  2020-05-30

4.  Early prediction of circulatory failure in the intensive care unit using machine learning.

Authors:  Stephanie L Hyland; Martin Faltys; Matthias Hüser; Xinrui Lyu; Thomas Gumbsch; Cristóbal Esteban; Christian Bock; Max Horn; Michael Moor; Bastian Rieck; Marc Zimmermann; Dean Bodenham; Karsten Borgwardt; Gunnar Rätsch; Tobias M Merz
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2020-03-09       Impact factor: 53.440

5.  Clinician involvement in research on machine learning-based predictive clinical decision support for the hospital setting: A scoping review.

Authors:  Jessica M Schwartz; Amanda J Moy; Sarah C Rossetti; Noémie Elhadad; Kenrick D Cato
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Predicting intervention onset in the ICU with switching state space models.

Authors:  Marzyeh Ghassemi; Mike Wu; Michael C Hughes; Peter Szolovits; Finale Doshi-Velez
Journal:  AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc       Date:  2017-07-26

7.  Continuous and automatic mortality risk prediction using vital signs in the intensive care unit: a hybrid neural network approach.

Authors:  Stephanie Baker; Wei Xiang; Ian Atkinson
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Early prediction of hemodynamic interventions in the intensive care unit using machine learning.

Authors:  Asif Rahman; Yale Chang; Junzi Dong; Bryan Conroy; Annamalai Natarajan; Takahiro Kinoshita; Francesco Vicario; Joseph Frassica; Minnan Xu-Wilson
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-11-14       Impact factor: 9.097

9.  Generalization in Clinical Prediction Models: The Blessing and Curse of Measurement Indicator Variables.

Authors:  Joseph Futoma; Morgan Simons; Finale Doshi-Velez; Rishikesan Kamaleswaran
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2021-06-25

10.  Incorporating repeated measurements into prediction models in the critical care setting: a framework, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joost D J Plate; Rutger R van de Leur; Luke P H Leenen; Falco Hietbrink; Linda M Peelen; M J C Eijkemans
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-10-26       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.