MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387960349 · doi:10.2196/45979

A Machine Learning Algorithm Predicting Acute Kidney Injury in Intensive Care Unit Patients (NAVOY Acute Kidney Injury): Proof-of-Concept Study

2023· article· en· W4387960349 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Inger Persson, Adam Grünwald, Ludivine Morvan, David Becedas, Martin Arlbrandt

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcute kidney injuryIntensive care unitProof of conceptMedicineIntensive care medicineComputer scienceAlgorithmMachine learningInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) represents a significant global health challenge, leading to increased patient distress and financial health care burdens. The development of AKI in intensive care unit (ICU) settings is linked to prolonged ICU stays, a heightened risk of long-term renal dysfunction, and elevated short- and long-term mortality rates. The current diagnostic approach for AKI is based on late indicators, such as elevated serum creatinine and decreased urine output, which can only detect AKI after renal injury has transpired. There are no treatments to reverse or restore renal function once AKI has developed, other than supportive care. Early prediction of AKI enables proactive management and may improve patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to develop a machine learning algorithm, NAVOY Acute Kidney Injury, capable of predicting the onset of AKI in ICU patients using data routinely collected in ICU electronic health records. The ultimate goal was to create a clinical decision support tool that empowers ICU clinicians to proactively manage AKI and, consequently, enhance patient outcomes. METHODS: We developed the NAVOY Acute Kidney Injury algorithm using a hybrid ensemble model, which combines the strengths of both a Random Forest (Leo Breiman and Adele Cutler) and an XGBoost model (Tianqi Chen). To ensure the accuracy of predictions, the algorithm used 22 clinical variables for hourly predictions of AKI as defined by the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines. Data for algorithm development were sourced from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lab for Computational Physiology Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV clinical database, focusing on ICU patients aged 18 years or older. RESULTS: The developed algorithm, NAVOY Acute Kidney Injury, uses 4 hours of input and can, with high accuracy, predict patients with a high risk of developing AKI 12 hours before onset. The prediction performance compares well with previously published prediction algorithms designed to predict AKI onset in accordance with Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes diagnosis criteria, with an impressive area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) of 0.91 and an area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.75. The algorithm's predictive performance was externally validated on an independent hold-out test data set, confirming its ability to predict AKI with exceptional accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: NAVOY Acute Kidney Injury is an important development in the field of critical care medicine. It offers the ability to predict the onset of AKI with high accuracy using only 4 hours of data routinely collected in ICU electronic health records. This early detection capability has the potential to strengthen patient monitoring and management, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes. Furthermore, NAVOY Acute Kidney Injury has been granted Conformite Europeenne (CE)-marking, marking a significant milestone as the first CE-marked AKI prediction algorithm for commercial use in European ICUs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.375 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207