Machine and Deep Learning Models for Hypoxemia Severity Triage in CBRNE Emergencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: This study develops machine learning (ML) models to predict hypoxemia severity during emergency triage, particularly in Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) scenarios, using physiological data from medical-grade sensors. METHODS: Tree-based models (TBMs) such as XGBoost, LightGBM, CatBoost, Random Forests (RFs), Voting Classifier ensembles, and sequential models (LSTM, GRU) were trained on the MIMIC-III and IV datasets. A preprocessing pipeline addressed missing data, class imbalances, and synthetic data flagged with masks. Models were evaluated using a 5-min prediction window with minute-level interpolations for timely interventions. RESULTS: TBMs outperformed sequential models in speed, interpretability, and reliability, making them better suited for real-time decision-making. Feature importance analysis identified six key physiological variables from the enhanced NEWS2+ score and emphasized the value of mask and score features for transparency. Voting Classifier ensembles showed slight metric gains but did not outperform individually optimized models, facing a precision-sensitivity tradeoff and slightly lower F1-scores for key severity levels. CONCLUSIONS: TBMs were effective for real-time hypoxemia prediction, while sequential models, though better at temporal handling, were computationally costly. This study highlights ML's potential to improve triage systems and reduce alarm fatigue, with future plans to incorporate multi-hospital datasets for broader applicability.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".