MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of an Early Warning System for Sepsis

2019· article· en· W3006920821 on OpenAlexaff
Chloé Pou-Prom, Maitreyee Sidhaye, David Dai

Bibliographic record

VenueComputing in Cardiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUndersamplingSepsisRandom forestMedicineRanking (information retrieval)StatisticsComputer scienceEmergency medicineInternal medicineArtificial intelligenceIntensive care medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition that is caused by infection, and is estimated to affects an estimated 1.7 million adults in the United States and contributes to 265,000 deaths annually. Identifying sepsis before it happens and treating it earlier leads to decreased mortality and decreased lengths of stay. As part of the PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge 2019, we developed an ensemble-based approach for the early detection of sepsis in ICU patients.Our final model predicted sepsis using the previous 24 hours of data, and consisted of a combination of two con-volutional neural networks and a random forest trained on different subsets of the data. In training our models, we experimented with random undersampling and cluster-based undersampling as a means for addressing severe class imbalance. On validation data, our final model achieved a utility score of 0.432 on hospital A (AUROC: 0.794, AUPRC: 0.101), 0.247 on hospital B (AUROC: 0.816, AUPRC: 0.056), and a utility of 0.375 on combined data from both hospitals (AUROC: 0.809, AUPRC: 0.089). On the heldout test data, the model obtained a utility score of 0.266 and we received an official ranking of 31/79.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputing in CardiologySame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207