Literature DB >> 33328078

Dynamic and explainable machine learning prediction of mortality in patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective study of high-frequency data in electronic patient records.

Hans-Christian Thorsen-Meyer1, Annelaura B Nielsen2, Anna P Nielsen2, Benjamin Skov Kaas-Hansen3, Palle Toft4, Jens Schierbeck4, Thomas Strøm4, Piotr J Chmura2, Marc Heimann5, Lars Dybdahl6, Lasse Spangsege6, Patrick Hulsen6, Kirstine Belling2, Søren Brunak7, Anders Perner8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many mortality prediction models have been developed for patients in intensive care units (ICUs); most are based on data available at ICU admission. We investigated whether machine learning methods using analyses of time-series data improved mortality prognostication for patients in the ICU by providing real-time predictions of 90-day mortality. In addition, we examined to what extent such a dynamic model could be made interpretable by quantifying and visualising the features that drive the predictions at different timepoints.
METHODS: Based on the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) III variables, we trained a machine learning model on longitudinal data from patients admitted to four ICUs in the Capital Region, Denmark, between 2011 and 2016. We included all patients older than 16 years of age, with an ICU stay lasting more than 1 h, and who had a Danish civil registration number to enable 90-day follow-up. We leveraged static data and physiological time-series data from electronic health records and the Danish National Patient Registry. A recurrent neural network was trained with a temporal resolution of 1 h. The model was internally validated using the holdout method with 20% of the training dataset and externally validated using previously unseen data from a fifth hospital in Denmark. Its performance was assessed with the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) as metrics, using bootstrapping with 1000 samples with replacement to construct 95% CIs. A Shapley additive explanations algorithm was applied to the prediction model to obtain explanations of the features that drive patient-specific predictions, and the contributions of each of the 44 features in the model were analysed and compared with the variables in the original SAPS III model.
FINDINGS: From a dataset containing 15 615 ICU admissions of 12 616 patients, we included 14 190 admissions of 11 492 patients in our analysis. Overall, 90-day mortality was 33·1% (3802 patients). The deep learning model showed a predictive performance on the holdout testing dataset that improved over the timecourse of an ICU stay: MCC 0·29 (95% CI 0·25-0·33) and AUROC 0·73 (0·71-0·74) at admission, 0·43 (0·40-0·47) and 0·82 (0·80-0·84) after 24 h, 0·50 (0·46-0·53) and 0·85 (0·84-0·87) after 72 h, and 0·57 (0·54-0·60) and 0·88 (0·87-0·89) at the time of discharge. The model exhibited good calibration properties. These results were validated in an external validation cohort of 5827 patients with 6748 admissions: MCC 0·29 (95% CI 0·27-0·32) and AUROC 0·75 (0·73-0·76) at admission, 0·41 (0·39-0·44) and 0·80 (0·79-0·81) after 24 h, 0·46 (0·43-0·48) and 0·82 (0·81-0·83) after 72 h, and 0·47 (0·44-0·49) and 0·83 (0·82-0·84) at the time of discharge.
INTERPRETATION: The prediction of 90-day mortality improved with 1-h sampling intervals during the ICU stay. The dynamic risk prediction can also be explained for an individual patient, visualising the features contributing to the prediction at any point in time. This explanation allows the clinician to determine whether there are elements in the current patient state and care that are potentially actionable, thus making the model suitable for further validation as a clinical tool. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk Foundation and the Innovation Fund Denmark.
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 33328078     DOI: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30018-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Digit Health        ISSN: 2589-7500


  40 in total

1.  Machine learning-based reclassification of germline variants of unknown significance: The RENOVO algorithm.

Authors:  Valentina Favalli; Giulia Tini; Emanuele Bonetti; Gianluca Vozza; Alessandro Guida; Sara Gandini; Pier Giuseppe Pelicci; Luca Mazzarella
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 2.  Data Science Trends Relevant to Nursing Practice: A Rapid Review of the 2020 Literature.

Authors:  Brian J Douthit; Rachel L Walden; Kenrick Cato; Cynthia P Coviak; Christopher Cruz; Fabio D'Agostino; Thompson Forbes; Grace Gao; Theresa A Kapetanovic; Mikyoung A Lee; Lisiane Pruinelli; Mary A Schultz; Ann Wieben; Alvin D Jeffery
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2022-02-09       Impact factor: 2.342

3.  Clinician perspectives on machine learning prognostic algorithms in the routine care of patients with cancer: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Ravi B Parikh; Christopher R Manz; Maria N Nelson; Chalanda N Evans; Susan H Regli; Nina O'Connor; Lynn M Schuchter; Lawrence N Shulman; Mitesh S Patel; Joanna Paladino; Judy A Shea
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Native-resolution myocardial principal Eulerian strain mapping using convolutional neural networks and Tagged Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Inas A Yassine; Ahmed M Ghanem; Nader S Metwalli; Ahmed Hamimi; Ronald Ouwerkerk; Jatin R Matta; Michael A Solomon; Jason M Elinoff; Ahmed M Gharib; Khaled Z Abd-Elmoniem
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2021-11-18       Impact factor: 4.589

5.  Using Shapes of COVID-19 Positive Patient-Specific Trajectories for Mortality Prediction.

Authors:  Alaleh Azhir; Soheila Talebi; Louis-Henri Merino; Thomas Lukasiewicz; Edgar Argulian; Jagat Narula; Borislava Mihaylova
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2022-05-23

6.  The leap to ordinal: Detailed functional prognosis after traumatic brain injury with a flexible modelling approach.

Authors:  Shubhayu Bhattacharyay; Ioan Milosevic; Lindsay Wilson; David K Menon; Robert D Stevens; Ewout W Steyerberg; David W Nelson; Ari Ercole
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 3.752

7.  Identifying and characterizing high-risk clusters in a heterogeneous ICU population with deep embedded clustering.

Authors:  José Castela Forte; Galiya Yeshmagambetova; Maureen L van der Grinten; Bart Hiemstra; Thomas Kaufmann; Ruben J Eck; Frederik Keus; Anne H Epema; Marco A Wiering; Iwan C C van der Horst
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Validation of an Automatic Tagging System for Identifying Respiratory and Hemodynamic Deterioration Events in the Intensive Care Unit.

Authors:  Danielle Jeddah; Ofer Chen; Ari M Lipsky; Andrea Forgacs; Gershon Celniker; Craig M Lilly; Itai M Pessach
Journal:  Healthc Inform Res       Date:  2021-07-31

9.  Machine Learning Models to Predict 30-Day Mortality in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.

Authors:  Jong Ho Kim; Young Suk Kwon; Moon Seong Baek
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 4.241

10.  Patient similarity analytics for explainable clinical risk prediction.

Authors:  Hao Sen Andrew Fang; Ngiap Chuan Tan; Wei Ying Tan; Ronald Wihal Oei; Mong Li Lee; Wynne Hsu
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.