Early heart rate variability evaluation enables to predict ICU patients’ outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart rate variability (HRV) is a mean to evaluate cardiac effects of autonomic nervous system activity, and a relation between HRV and outcome has been proposed in various types of patients. We attempted to evaluate the best determinants of such variation in survival prediction using a physiological data-warehousing program. Plethysmogram tracings (PPG) were recorded at 75 Hz from the standard monitoring system, for a 2 h period, during the 24 h following ICU admission. Physiological data recording was associated with metadata collection. HRV was derived from PPG in either the temporal and non-linear domains. 540 consecutive patients were recorded. A lower LF/HF, SD2/SD1 ratios and Shannon entropy values on admission were associated with a higher ICU mortality. SpO2/FiO2 ratio and HRV parameters (LF/HF and Shannon entropy) were independent correlated with mortality in the multivariate analysis. Machine-learning using neural network (kNN) enabled to determine a simple decision tree combining the three best determinants (SDNN, Shannon Entropy, SD2/SD1 ratio) of a composite outcome index. HRV measured on admission enables to predict outcome in the ICU or at Day-28, independently of the admission diagnosis, treatment and mechanical ventilation requirement.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02893462.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".