MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040788463 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-67952-0

Generalizable deep temporal models for predicting episodes of sudden hypotension in critically ill patients: a personalized approach

2020· article· en· W3040788463 on OpenAlexafffund
Brandon Chan, Brian Chen, Alireza Sedghi, Philip Laird, David M. Maslove, Parvin Mousavi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSoutheastern Ontario Academic Medical OrganizationOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationQueen's University
KeywordsCritically illIntensive care medicineMedicineComputer scienceBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vast quantities of data generated and collected in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) have given rise to large retrospective datasets that are frequently used for observational studies. The temporal nature and fine granularity of much of the data collected in the ICU enable the pursuit of predictive modeling. In particular, forecasting acute hypotensive episodes (AHE) in intensive care patients has been of interest to researchers in critical care medicine. Given an advance warning of an AHE, care providers may be prompted to search for evolving disease processes and help mitigate negative clinical outcomes. However, the conventionally adopted definition of an AHE does not account for inter-patient variability and is restrictive. To reflect the wider trend of global clinical and research efforts in precision medicine, we introduce a patient-specific definition of AHE in this study and propose deep learning based models to predict this novel definition of AHE in data from multiple independent institutions. We provide extensive evaluation of the models by studying their accuracies in detecting patient-specific AHEs with lead-times ranging from 10 min to 1 hour before the onset of the event. The resulting models achieve AUROC values ranging from 0.57-0.87 depending on the lead time of the prediction. We demonstrate the generalizability and robustness of our approach through the use of independent multi-institutional data.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations47
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207