MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4390700096 · doi:10.1101/2024.01.03.24300797

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Based Prediction of Mortality, ICU Admission and Ventilation Support Requirement for COVID-19 Patients Using 122 Clinical and Demographic Parameters

2024· preprint· en· W4390700096 sur OpenAlexaff
Mahbubunnabi Tamal, Mohammad Marufur Rahman, Maryam Alhasim, Mobarak Al Mulhim, Mohamed Deriche

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Établissements canadiensArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)Innovation Cluster (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSupport vector machineRandom forestArtificial intelligenceNaive Bayes classifierComputer scienceReceiver operating characteristicUndersamplingBootstrapping (finance)Machine learningArtificial neural networkFeature selectionLogistic regressionCross-validationIntensive careLinear discriminant analysisData miningStatisticsMedicineMathematicsIntensive care medicineEconometrics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Introduction COVID-19 can rapidly lead to severe respiratory problems and can result in an overwhelming burden on healthcare systems worldwide, making it imperative to identify high-risk patients and predict survival and need for intensive care (ICU). Most of the proposed modes are not well reported making them less reproducible and prone to high risk of bias. Methods In this study, the performances of seven classical machine (Random Forest (RF), Logistic Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), k-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), XGBoost, Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) and Gaussian Naïve Bayes (NB)) and two deep leaning models (Deep Neural Network (DNN) and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM)) in combination with two widely used feature selection methods (random forest and extra tree classifier) were investigated to predict “last status” representing mortality, “ICU requirement”, and “ventilation days”. Fivefold cross-validation was used for training and validation purposes. In each fold, 80% data were used for training the models and the rest 20% were preserved for validation. To minimize bias, the training and testing sets were split maintaining similar distributions. Before splitting, k-nearest neighbour (KNN) imputation algorithm was employed to resolve the issue of missing data. On the other hand, bootstrapping technique was used for both oversampling and undersampling to address the issue of data imbalance. Publicly available 122 demographic and clinical features of 1384 patients were used. The performances of the models were evaluated using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC (Area Under the Curve) of Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC). Results Only 10 features out of 122 were found to be useful in prediction modelling with “Acute kidney injury during hospitalization” feature being the most important one. Blood pH presents a decent discrimination capability especially in predicting “ICU requirement”, and “ventilated days”, Whereas gender and age are found to be vital in predicting “last status”. It was observed that selecting more than 10 features lower the prediction accuracy. The performances of different algorithms depend on number of features and data pre-processing techniques. LSTM with the with balanced data and 10 features performs the best in predicting “last status” as well as “ICU requirement” with an average of 90%, 92%, 86% and 95% accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC respectively. DNN performs the best in predicting “Ventilation days” with 88% accuracy. For “ICU requirement” which is a binary prediction task, data pre-processing technique does not have any influence in making prediction and performances of different methods are comparable (89%, 98%, 78% and 95% accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC respectively). However, the number of features selected vary with data pre-processing technique. Conclusion Considering all the factors and limitations including absence of exact time point of clinical onset, LSTM with carefully selected features can accurately predict “last status” and “ICU requirement” with approximately 90% accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. DNN performs the best in predicting “Ventilation days”. Appropriate machine learning algorithm with carefully selected features and balance data can accurately predict mortality, ICU requirement and ventilation support. Such model can be very useful in emergency and pandemic where prompt and precise decision making is crucial.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,335
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,249
Tête enseignante GPT0,457
Écart entre enseignants0,208 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxivMême sujetCOVID-19 diagnosis using AITravaux en français237 207