| Literature DB >> 35281234 |
Michael A Pienaar1, Joseph B Sempa2, Nicolaas Luwes3, Lincoln J Solomon1.
Abstract
Objectives: The performance of mortality prediction models remain a challenge in lower- and middle-income countries. We developed an artificial neural network (ANN) model for the prediction of mortality in two tertiary pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in South Africa using free to download and use software and commercially available computers. These models were compared to a logistic regression model and a recalibrated version of the Pediatric Index of Mortality 3. Design: This study used data from a retrospective cohort study to develop an artificial neural model and logistic regression model for mortality prediction. The outcome evaluated was death in PICU. Setting: Two tertiary PICUs in South Africa. Patients: 2,089 patients up to the age of 13 completed years were included in the study. Interventions: None. Measurements and MainEntities:
Keywords: artificial neural network; children; critical care; machine learning; severity of illness
Year: 2022 PMID: 35281234 PMCID: PMC8916561 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2022.797080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Variables collected.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Age | Continuous | |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | Continuous | |
| Pupil reactions to bright light (>3mm and fixed, unresponsive) | Binary | |
| Absolute base excess in arterial blood | Continuous | |
| Partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2) (mmHg) | Continuous | |
| Fraction of inspired oxygen(FiO2) (decimal) | Continuous | |
| ([FiO2 x 100]/PaO2) | Continuous | |
| Recovery from non-cardiac procedure | Binary | |
| Recovery from non-bypass cardiac procedure | Binary | |
| Recovery from bypass cardiac procedure | Binary | |
| Binary | ||
| Binary | ||
| Binary | ||
Diagnostic risk categories from PIM3 (.
Figure 1Predictive performance of the ANN, LR, recalibrated PIM3 and original PIM3 models. (A) The ROC curve. (B) The precision-recall curve. (C) The calibration cure. (D) The decision curve. The area under the curve in A and B and the slope of the calibration curve in C are shown in the legend. PIM3 performance metrics were calculated across the whole data set, while the ANN and LR performance metrics were calculated on the test set.
Descriptive analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age of the respondents; mean (SD) | 2,086 | 43.16 (49.98) | 36.74 (46.67) | 0.0627 |
| Absolute value of base excess (mmol/l): mean (SD) | 2,089 | 7.07 (6.71) | 11.53 (8.68) | <0.0001 |
| SBP (mmHg): | 2,062 | 101.21 (23.85) | 88.14 (27.94) | <0.0001 |
| <0.0001 | ||||
| No | 2,040 | 1,841 (99.2) | 199 (85.4) | |
| Yes | 49 | 15 (0.8) | 34 (14.6) | |
| <0.0001 | ||||
| No | 1,755 | 1,526 (82.2) | 229 (98.3) | |
| Yes | 334 | 330 (17.8) | 4 (1.7) | |
| <0.0001 | ||||
| No | 1,363 | 1289 (69.5) | 74 (31.8) | |
| Yes | 726 | 567 (30.5 | 159 (68.2 | |
| (SBP)2/1000: mean (SD) | 2,087 | 10.67 (4.93) | 8.4 (5.01) | <0.0001 |
| FiO2 as a decimal: mean (SD) | 2,071 | 0.42 (0.24) | 0.63 (0.27) | <0.0001 |
| PaO2 (mmHg): mean (SD) | 2,058 | 93.55 (48.85) | 88.18 (65.59) | 0.132 |
| 100*FiO2/PaO2: mean (SD) | 2,087 | 0.59 (0.62) | 1.09 (1.07) | <0.0001 |
| 1 | ||||
| No | 2,079 | 1,847 (99.5) | 232 (99.6) | |
| Yes | 10 | 9 (0.5) | 1 (0.4) | |
| 0.8441 | ||||
| No | 2,079 | 1,825 (98.3) | 228 (97.9) | |
| Yes | 10 | 32 (1.7) | 5 (2.1) | |
| <0.0001 | ||||
| No | 1,765 | 1,543 (83.1) | 222 (95.3) | |
| Yes | 324 | 313 (16.9) | 11 (4.7) | |
| <0.0001 | ||||
| No | 1,952 | 1,787 (96.3) | 165 (70.8) | |
| Yes | 137 | 69 (3.7) | 68 (29.2) | |
| <0.0001 | ||||
| No | 2,028 | 1,812 (97.6) | 216 (92.7) | |
| Yes | 61 | 44 (2.4) | 17 (7.3) | |
| <0.0001 | ||||
| No | 1,838 | 1,611 (86.8) | 227 (97.4) | |
| Yes | 251 | 245 (13.2) | 6 (2.6) |
SD, Standard deviation; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; FiO.
Logistic regression model.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Age | 0.0033 | 0.9994 | 0.094 |
| Pupils fixed to light | 2.2058 | 4.1024 | <0.0001 |
| Elective admission | −1.4421 | 0.0833 | 0.0067 |
| Mechanical ventilation in first hour of admission | 0.7174 | 1.4225 | 0.0001 |
| Absolute value of base excess | 0.0731 | 1.0529 | <0.0001 |
| SBP | −0.0081 | 0.9849 | 0.026 |
|
| |||
| FiO2 as decimal | 1.7802 | 3.0682 | <0.0001 |
| PaO2 mmHg | −0.0027 | 0.9944 | 0.0737 |
| Non–cardiac procedure | −0.7213 | 0.234 | 0.053 |
| Very high risk diagnosis | 1.5721 | 3.0343 | <0.0001 |
| High risk diagnosis | 1.1497 | 1.6048 | 0.0009 |
| Low risk diagnosis | −1.5832 | 0.0853 | 0.0004 |
OR, Odds ratio; CI, Confidence Interval; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; FiO.
Recalibrated PIM3 model.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Pupils fixed to light | 2.1819 | 8.8635 | <0.0001 |
| Elective admission | −1.4844 | 0.2266 | 0.0049 |
| Mechanical ventilation in first hour of admission | 0.8826 | 2.4171 | <0.0001 |
| Absolute value of base excess | 0.0728 | 1.0755 | <0.0001 |
| Systolic Blood Pressure(SBP) | −0.006 | 0.994 | 0.6636 |
| SBP*SBP/1000 | −0.0169 | 0.9833 | 0.8233 |
| 100*FiO2/PaO2 | 0.4527 | 1.5725 | <0.0001 |
| Bypass cardiac procedure | −1.3455 | 0.2604 | 0.3738 |
| Non-bypass cardiac procedure | −0.1055 | 0.8999 | 0.8617 |
| Non-cardiac procedure | −0.7835 | 0.4568 | 0.0348 |
| Very high risk diagnosis | 1.5912 | 4.9096 | <0.0001 |
| High risk diagnosis | 1.1528 | 3.1672 | 0.0007 |
| Low risk diagnosis | −1.6566 | 0.1908 | 0.0002 |
OR, Odds ratio; CI, Confidence Interval; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; FiO.
Cross validation performance.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| AUROC | 0.82 |
| AUPRC | 0.48 |
| Mean squared error | 0.07 |
| Calibration slope | 1.07 |
| Calibration intercept | 0.03 |
AUROC, Area under the receiver operating curve; AUPRC, Area under the precision recall curve.