MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945272360 · doi:10.1186/s12911-019-0820-1

Patient centred variables with univariate associations with unplanned ICU admission: a systematic review

2019· review· en· W2945272360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James Malycha, Timothy Bonnici, David A. Clifton, Guy Ludbrook, Duncan Young, Peter Watkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUniversity of AdelaideNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome TrustWellcome
KeywordsMedicineUnivariateCINAHLData extractionMEDLINEIntensive care unitUnivariate analysisInclusion and exclusion criteriaEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineMultivariate analysisInternal medicineMultivariate statisticsPsychological interventionAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multiple predictive scores using Electronic Patient Record data have been developed for hospitalised patients at risk of clinical deterioration. Methods used to select patient centred variables for inclusion in these scores varies. We performed a systematic review to describe univariate associations with unplanned Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission with the aim of assisting model development for future scores that predict clinical deterioration. METHODS: Data sources were MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Included studies were published since 2000 describing an association between patient centred variables and unplanned ICU admission determined using univariate analysis. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts against inclusion and exclusion criteria. DistillerSR (Evidence Partners, Canada, Ottawa, Ontario) software was used to manage the data and identify duplicate search results. All screening and data extraction forms were implemented within DistillerSR. Study quality was assessed using an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Variables were analysed for strength of association with unplanned ICU admission. RESULTS: The database search yielded 1520 unique studies; 1462 were removed after title and abstract review; 57 underwent full text screening; 16 studies were included. One hundred and eighty nine variables with an evaluated univariate association with unplanned ICU admission were described. DISCUSSION: Being male, increasing age, a history of congestive cardiac failure or diabetes, a diagnosis of hepatic disease or having abnormal vital signs were all strongly associated with ICU admission. CONCLUSION: These findings will assist variable selection during the development of future models predicting unplanned ICU admission. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is a component of a larger body of work registered in the ISRCTN registry ( ISRCTN12518261 ).

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0120.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision MakingSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207