MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176694107 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0253443

Deep learning to predict long-term mortality in patients requiring 7 days of mechanical ventilation

2021· article· en· W3176694107 on OpenAlexaff
Naomi George, Edward T. Moseley, René Eber, Jennifer Siu, Mathew Samuel, Jonathan Yam, Kexin Huang, Leo Anthony Celi, Charlotta Lindvall

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsMechanical ventilationMedicineIntensive care unitCohortRetrospective cohort studyReceiver operating characteristicIntensive careEmergency medicineCohort studySAPS IIVentilation (architecture)Intensive care medicineInternal medicineAPACHE II

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Among patients with acute respiratory failure requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation, tracheostomies are typically placed after approximately 7 to 10 days. Yet half of patients admitted to the intensive care unit receiving tracheostomy will die within a year, often within three months. Existing mortality prediction models for prolonged mechanical ventilation, such as the ProVent Score, have poor sensitivity and are not applied until after 14 days of mechanical ventilation. We developed a model to predict 3-month mortality in patients requiring more than 7 days of mechanical ventilation using deep learning techniques and compared this to existing mortality models. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: The Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III Database. Patients: All adults requiring ≥ 7 days of mechanical ventilation. Measurements: A neural network model for 3-month mortality was created using process-of-care variables, including demographic, physiologic and clinical data. The area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) was compared to the ProVent model at predicting 3 and 12-month mortality. Shapley values were used to identify the variables with the greatest contributions to the model. RESULTS: There were 4,334 encounters divided into a development cohort (n = 3467) and a testing cohort (n = 867). The final deep learning model included 250 variables and had an AUROC of 0.74 for predicting 3-month mortality at day 7 of mechanical ventilation versus 0.59 for the ProVent model. Older age and elevated Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) Score on intensive care unit admission had the largest contribution to predicting mortality. DISCUSSION: We developed a deep learning prediction model for 3-month mortality among patients requiring ≥ 7 days of mechanical ventilation using a neural network approach utilizing readily available clinical variables. The model outperforms the ProVent model for predicting mortality among patients requiring ≥ 7 days of mechanical ventilation. This model requires external validation.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207