| Literature DB >> 35888187 |
Huda M Alshanbari1, Tahir Mehmood2, Waqas Sami3,4, Wael Alturaiki5, Mauawia A Hamza6,7, Bandar Alosaimi7.
Abstract
Healthcare systems have been under immense pressure since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic; hence, studies on using machine learning (ML) methods for classifying ICU admissions and resource allocation are urgently needed. We investigated whether ML can propose a useful classification model for predicting the ICU admissions of COVID-19 patients. In this retrospective study, the clinical characteristics and laboratory findings of 100 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 tests were retrieved between May 2020 and January 2021. Based on patients' demographic and clinical data, we analyzed the capability of the proposed weighted radial kernel support vector machine (SVM), coupled with (RFE). The proposed method is compared with other reference methods such as linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and kernel-based SVM variants including the linear, polynomial, and radial kernels coupled with REF for predicting ICU admissions of COVID-19 patients. An initial performance assessment indicated that the SVM with weighted radial kernels coupled with REF outperformed the other classification methods in discriminating between ICU and non-ICU admissions in COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, applying the Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) with weighted radial kernel SVM identified a significant set of variables that can predict and statistically distinguish ICU from non-ICU COVID-19 patients. The patients' weight, PCR Ct Value, CCL19, INF-β, BLC, INR, PT, PTT, CKMB, HB, platelets, RBC, urea, creatinine and albumin results were found to be the significant predicting features. We believe that weighted radial kernel SVM can be used as an assisting ML approach to guide hospital decision makers in resource allocation and mobilization between intensive care and isolation units. We model the data retrospectively on a selected subset of patient-derived variables based on previous knowledge of ICU admission and this needs to be trained in order to forecast prospectively.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19 burden; ICU; classification; healthcare systems; machine learning; prediction; public health measures; support vector machine
Year: 2022 PMID: 35888187 PMCID: PMC9318483 DOI: 10.3390/life12071100
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Life (Basel) ISSN: 2075-1729
The distribution of demographic and clinical characteristics of the ICU and non-ICU patients.
| Variable | All Patients ( | Non-ICU ( | ICU ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Demographic | |||
| Age | |||
| range | 24–84 | 24–84 | 25–79 |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 56 (56%) | 25 (50%) | 31 (62%) |
| Female | 44 (44%) | 25 (50%) | 19 (38%) |
| Nationality | |||
| Saudi | 57 (57%) | 28 (56%) | 29 (58%) |
| Non- Saudi | 43 (43%) | 22 (44%) | 21 (42%) |
| Fatality | |||
| Died | 10 (10%) | 0 (0%) | 10 (20%) |
| Survived | 90 (90%) | 50 (100%) | 40 (80%) |
| Respiratory Disease | |||
| Yes | 12 (12%) | 3 (6%) | 9 (18%) |
| No | 88 (88%) | 47 (94%) | 41 (82%) |
| Chronic Disease | |||
| Yes | 62 (62%) | 30 (60%) | 32 (64%) |
| No | 38 (38%) | 20 (40%) | 18 (36%) |
| Circulatory Disease | |||
| Yes | 47 (47%) | 24 (48%) | 23 (46%) |
| No | 53 (53%) | 26 (52%) | 27 (54%) |
| Metabolic Disease | |||
| Yes | 62 (62%) | 20 (40%) | 18 (36%) |
| No | 38 (38%) | 30 (60%) | 32 (64%) |
| Kidney Disease | |||
| Yes | 8 (8%) | 1 (2%) | 7 (14%) |
| No | 92 (92%) | 49 (98%) | 43 (86%) |
Figure 1The comparison of validated accuracies of ICU and non-ICU discrimination including LDA, linear, polynomial, radial, and weighted radial SVM.
Figure 2The repeated 20-fold cross-validation accuracies are presented at different values in terms of cost and weight.
Figure 3The cross-validated accuracy of ICU patients extracted by RFE weighted radial SVM models.
The optimal weighted radial SVM model. The SVM model predicted 15 risk factors with significant p-values discriminating ICU patients from non-ICU patients.
| Variable | Non-ICU Mean (SD) | ICU Mean (SD) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Weight | 81.8 (18.6) | 95.4 (30.9) | 0.009 |
| 2 | PCR Ct Value | 27.0 (4.1) | 25.4 (5.3) | 0.091 |
| 3 | CCL19 | 0.1 (0.2) | 0.2 (0.2) | 0.307 |
| 4 | INF-β | 12.8 (21.7) | 53.4 (55.1) | <0.001 |
| 5 | BLC | 0.2 (0.2) | 0.5 (0.6) | 0.001 |
| 6 | INR | 1.0 (0.2) | 1.3 (0.8) | 0.009 |
| 7 | PT | 13.6 (2.3) | 17.6 (10.4) | 0.009 |
| 8 | PTT | 38.0 (10.7) | 45.3 (13.4) | 0.003 |
| 9 | CK.MB | 26.1 (8.4) | 43.8 (58.5) | 0.036 |
| 10 | HB | 12.6 (2.0) | 9.5 (2.1) | <0.001 |
| 11 | Platelets | 346.3 (118.8) | 239.5 (132.3) | <0.001 |
| 12 | RBC | 4.5 (0.6) | 3.3 (0.8) | <0.001 |
| 13 | Urea | 6.3 (3.4) | 13.5 (11.1) | <0.001 |
| 14 | Creatinine | 78.5 (28.9) | 116.0 (85.1) | 0.004 |
| 15 | Albumin | 33.4 (3.8) | 27.1 (6.0) | <0.001 |
* Significant at p-value > 0.05.