MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898260841 · doi:10.1186/s13054-018-2215-6

Development and internal validation of the multivariable CIPHER (Collaborative Integrated Pregnancy High-dependency Estimate of Risk) clinical risk prediction model

2018· article· en· W2898260841 on OpenAlexafffund
Beth A. Payne, Helen Ryan, Jeffrey N. Bone, Laura A. Magee, Alice Aarvold, J. Mark Ansermino, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, M. Bowen, José Guilherme Cecatti, Cynthia Chazotte, Tim Crozier, Anne-Cornélie J. M. Pont, Oktay Demirkıran, Tao Duan, Marlot C. Kallen, Wessel Ganzevoort, Michael Geary, Dena Goffman, Jennifer A. Hutcheon, K.S. Joseph, Stephen E. Lapinsky, Isam Lataifeh, Jing Li, Sarka Liskonova, Emily M. Hamel, Fionnuala M. McAuliffe, Colm O’Herlihy, Ben W. Mol, P. Gareth R. Seaward, Ramzy Tadros, Türkan Toğal, Rahat Qureshi, Ugochinyere Vivian Ukah, Daniela N. Vásquez, Euan M. Wallace, Paul J. Yong, Vivian Zhou, Keith R. Walley, Peter von Dadelszen

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoBC Children's HospitalWomen's Health Research Institute
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineDependency (UML)High risk pregnancyMultivariable calculusRisk assessmentPregnancyRisk analysis (engineering)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer securityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) outcome prediction models, such as Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE), were designed in general critical care populations and their use in obstetric populations is contentious. The aim of the CIPHER (Collaborative Integrated Pregnancy High-dependency Estimate of Risk) study was to develop and internally validate a multivariable prognostic model calibrated specifically for pregnant or recently delivered women admitted for critical care. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort was created for this study from 13 tertiary facilities across five high-income and six low- or middle-income countries. Women admitted to an ICU for more than 24 h during pregnancy or less than 6 weeks post-partum from 2000 to 2012 were included in the cohort. A composite primary outcome was defined as maternal death or need for organ support for more than 7 days or acute life-saving intervention. Model development involved selection of candidate predictor variables based on prior evidence of effect, availability across study sites, and use of LASSO (Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator) model building after multiple imputation using chained equations to address missing data for variable selection. The final model was estimated using multivariable logistic regression. Internal validation was completed using bootstrapping to correct for optimism in model performance measures of discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: Overall, 127 out of 769 (16.5%) women experienced an adverse outcome. Predictors included in the final CIPHER model were maternal age, surgery in the preceding 24 h, systolic blood pressure, Glasgow Coma Scale score, serum sodium, serum potassium, activated partial thromboplastin time, arterial blood gas (ABG) pH, serum creatinine, and serum bilirubin. After internal validation, the model maintained excellent discrimination (area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.84) and good calibration (slope of 0.92, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.92 and intercept of -0.11, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.08). CONCLUSIONS: The CIPHER model has the potential to be a pragmatic risk prediction tool. CIPHER can identify critically ill pregnant women at highest risk for adverse outcomes, inform counseling of patients about risk, and facilitate bench-marking of outcomes between centers by adjusting for baseline risk.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207