MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323034706 · doi:10.1002/9781119790686.ch15

AI in the Intensive Care Unit

2023· other· en· W4323034706 on OpenAlexaff
Dipayan Chaudhuri, Sandeep S. Kohli

Bibliographic record

VenueAI in Clinical Medicine · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityOakville-Trafalgar Memorial HospitalImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntensive care unitCritically illIntensive care medicineIntensive carePatient careAutomationReinforcement learningSepsisMedical emergencyMedicineComputer scienceUnit (ring theory)Decision support systemArtificial intelligencePsychologyNursingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Relative to other hospital settings where patient care is performed, the intensive care unit (ICU) is a highly monitored and therefore data-rich environment. Multiple opportunities exist to utilize these data to assist with clinical decision support and the prediction of patient outcomes. This chapter will introduce current evidence for the use of AI in the care of critically ill patients, specifically focusing on the methodologies being used to solve ICU problems, the diagnosis and management of sepsis, and the potential for deep learning and reinforcement learning to aid in automation. The limitations and future opportunities for the use of AI in the ICU will also be explored.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAI in Clinical MedicineSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207