MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408123621 · doi:10.3390/jcm14051711

Early Prediction of ICU Mortality in Patients with Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Using Machine Learning: The MEMORIAL Study

2025· article· en· W4408123621 on OpenAlexaff
Jesús Villar, Jesús M. González‐Martín, Cristina Fernández, José M. Añón, Carlos Ferrando, Juan M. Mora-Ordóñez, Domingo Martínez, Fernando Mosteiro, Alfonso Ambrós, Lorena Fernández de la Cruz, Isabel Murcia, Ánxela Vidal, David Pestaña, Miguel A. Romera, Raquel Montiel, Ana M. Domínguez-Berrot, Juan A. Soler, Estrella Gómez-Bentolila, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Tamás Szakmány

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos III
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionMechanical ventilationReceiver operating characteristicEmergency medicineFraction of inspired oxygenInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Early prediction of ICU death in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) could inform clinicians for targeting therapies to reduce harm and increase survival. We sought to determine clinical modifiable and non-modifiable features during the first 24 h of AHRF associated with ICU death. Methods: This is a development, testing, and validation study using data from a prospective, multicenter, nation-based, observational cohort of 1241 patients with AHRF (defined as PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg on mechanical ventilation [MV] with positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP] ≥ 5 cmH2O and FiO2 ≥ 0.3) from any etiology. Using relevant features captured at AHRF diagnosis and within 24 h, we developed a logistic regression model following variable selection by genetic algorithm and machine learning (ML) approaches. Results: We analyzed 1193 patients, after excluding 48 patients with no data at 24 h after AHRF diagnosis. Using repeated random sampling, we selected 75% (n = 900) for model development and testing, and 25% (n = 293) for final validation. Risk modeling identified six major predictors of ICU death, including patient’s age, and values at 24 h of PEEP, FiO2, plateau pressure, tidal volume, and number of extrapulmonary organ failures. Performance with ML methods was similar to logistic regression and achieved a high area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.88, 95%CI 0.86–0.90. Validation confirmed adequate model performance (AUROC 0.83, 95%CI 0.78–0.88). Conclusions: ML and traditional methods led to an encouraging model to predict ICU death in ventilated AHRF as early as 24 h after diagnosis. More research is needed to identify modifiable factors to prevent ICU deaths.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→