MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389334492 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000006753

Novel Preoperative Risk Stratification Using Digital Phenotyping Applying a Scalable Machine-Learning Approach

2023· article· en· W4389334492 on OpenAlexafffund
Pascal Laferrière-Langlois, Fergus Imrie, Marc-Andre Geraldo, Theodora Wingert, Nadia Lahrichi, Mihaela van der Schaar, Maxime Cannesson

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeIntensive care unitReceiver operating characteristicCohortAdverse effectMachine learningEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Classification of perioperative risk is important for patient care, resource allocation, and guiding shared decision-making. Using discriminative features from the electronic health record (EHR), machine-learning algorithms can create digital phenotypes among heterogenous populations, representing distinct patient subpopulations grouped by shared characteristics, from which we can personalize care, anticipate clinical care trajectories, and explore therapies. We hypothesized that digital phenotypes in preoperative settings are associated with postoperative adverse events including in-hospital and 30-day mortality, 30-day surgical redo, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and hospital length of stay (LOS). METHODS: We identified all laminectomies, colectomies, and thoracic surgeries performed over a 9-year period from a large hospital system. Seventy-seven readily extractable preoperative features were first selected from clinical consensus, including demographics, medical history, and lab results. Three surgery-specific datasets were built and split into derivation and validation cohorts using chronological occurrence. Consensus k -means clustering was performed independently on each derivation cohort, from which phenotypes' characteristics were explored. Cluster assignments were used to train a random forest model to assign patient phenotypes in validation cohorts. We reconducted descriptive analyses on validation cohorts to confirm the similarity of patient characteristics with derivation cohorts, and quantified the association of each phenotype with postoperative adverse events by using the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). We compared our approach to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) alone and investigated a combination of our phenotypes with the ASA score. RESULTS: A total of 7251 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 2770 were held out in a validation dataset based on chronological occurrence. Using segmentation metrics and clinical consensus, 3 distinct phenotypes were created for each surgery. The main features used for segmentation included urgency of the procedure, preoperative LOS, age, and comorbidities. The most relevant characteristics varied for each of the 3 surgeries. Low-risk phenotype alpha was the most common (2039 of 2770, 74%), while high-risk phenotype gamma was the rarest (302 of 2770, 11%). Adverse outcomes progressively increased from phenotypes alpha to gamma, including 30-day mortality (0.3%, 2.1%, and 6.0%, respectively), in-hospital mortality (0.2%, 2.3%, and 7.3%), and prolonged hospital LOS (3.4%, 22.1%, and 25.8%). When combined with the ASA score, digital phenotypes achieved higher AUROC than the ASA score alone (hospital mortality: 0.91 vs 0.84; prolonged hospitalization: 0.80 vs 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: For 3 frequently performed surgeries, we identified 3 digital phenotypes. The typical profiles of each phenotype were described and could be used to anticipate adverse postoperative events.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207