Analytics with artificial intelligence to advance the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has found its way into clinical studies in the era of big data. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or acute lung injury (ALI) is a clinical syndrome that encompasses a heterogeneous population. Management of such heterogeneous patient population is a big challenge for clinicians. With accumulating ALI datasets being publicly available, more knowledge could be discovered with sophisticated analytics. We reviewed literatures with big data analytics to understand the role of AI for improving the caring of patients with ALI/ARDS. Many studies have utilized the electronic medical records (EMR) data for the identification and prognostication of ARDS patients. As increasing number of ARDS clinical trials data is open to public, secondary analysis on these combined datasets provide a powerful way of finding solution to clinical questions with a new perspective. AI techniques such as Classification and Regression Tree (CART) and artificial neural networks (ANN) have also been successfully used in the investigation of ARDS problems. Individualized treatment of ARDS could be implemented with a support from AI as we are now able to classify ARDS into many subphenotypes by unsupervised machine learning algorithms. Interestingly, these subphenotypes show different responses to a certain intervention. However, current analytics involving ARDS have not fully incorporated information from omics such as transcriptome, proteomics, daily activities and environmental conditions. AI technology is assisting us to interpret complex data of ARDS patients and enable us to further improve the management of ARDS patients in future with individual treatment plans.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".