Machine learning to predict myocardial injury and death after non‐cardiac surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myocardial injury due to ischaemia within 30 days of non-cardiac surgery is prognostically relevant. We aimed to determine the discrimination, calibration, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of single-layer and multiple-layer neural networks for myocardial injury and death within 30 postoperative days. We analysed data from 24,589 participants in the Vascular Events in Non-cardiac Surgery Patients Cohort Evaluation study. Validation was performed on a randomly selected subset of the study population. Discrimination for myocardial injury by single-layer vs. multiple-layer models generated areas (95%CI) under the receiver operating characteristic curve of: 0.70 (0.69-0.72) vs. 0.71 (0.70-0.73) with variables available before surgical referral, p < 0.001; 0.73 (0.72-0.75) vs. 0.75 (0.74-0.76) with additional variables available on admission, but before surgery, p < 0.001; and 0.76 (0.75-0.77) vs. 0.77 (0.76-0.78) with the addition of subsequent variables, p < 0.001. Discrimination for death by single-layer vs. multiple-layer models generated areas (95%CI) under the receiver operating characteristic curve of: 0.71 (0.66-0.76) vs. 0.74 (0.71-0.77) with variables available before surgical referral, p = 0.04; 0.78 (0.73-0.82) vs. 0.83 (0.79-0.86) with additional variables available on admission but before surgery, p = 0.01; and 0.87 (0.83-0.89) vs. 0.87 (0.85-0.90) with the addition of subsequent variables, p = 0.52. The accuracy of the multiple-layer model for myocardial injury and death with all variables was 70% and 89%, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".