MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588656698

Improving the predictability of ICU illness severity scales

2011· article· en· W1588656698 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Alqarni, Yaseen M. Arabi, Tamar Kakiashvili, Mohammad Khedr, Waldemar W. Koczkodaj, Jerzy Leszek, Artur Przelaskowski, Krzysztof Rutkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueFederated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SudburyLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictabilityConsistency (knowledge bases)Critical illnessPairwise comparisonIntensive care medicineComputer scienceIntensive careCritically illAPACHE IISeverity of illnessMedicineStatisticsIntensive care unitEconometricsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study demonstrates how to improve the predictability of one of the commonly used ICUs severity of illness scales, namely APACHE II, by using the consistency-driven pairwise comparisons (CDPC) method. From a conceptual view, there is little doubt that all items have exactly equal importance or contribution to predicting mortality risk of patients admitted to ICUs. Computing new weights for all individual items is a considerable step forward since it is based on reasonable to assume that not all individual items have equal contribution in predicting mortality risk. The received predictability improvement is 1.6% (from 70.9% to 72.5%) and the standard error decreased from 0.046 to 0.045. This must be taken as an indication of the right way to go.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederated Conference on Computer Science and Information SystemsSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207