MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410629063 · doi:10.2196/60885

Predicting Episodes of Hypovigilance in Intensive Care Units Using Routine Physiological Parameters and Artificial Intelligence: Derivation Study

2025· article· en· W4410629063 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raphaëlle Giguère, Victor Niaussat, Monia Noël-Hunter, William Witteman, Tanya S. Paul, Alexandre Marois, Philippe Després, Simon Duchesne, Patrick Archambault

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR AI · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalThales (Canada)Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-Appalaches
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Delirium is prevalent in intensive care units (ICUs), often leading to adverse outcomes. Hypoactive delirium is particularly difficult to detect. Despite the development of new tools, the timely identification of hypoactive delirium remains clinically challenging due to its dynamic nature, lack of human resources, lack of reliable monitoring tools, and subtle clinical signs including hypovigilance. Machine learning models could support the identification of hypoactive delirium episodes by better detecting episodes of hypovigilance. Objective: Develop an artificial intelligence prediction model capable of detecting hypovigilance events using routinely collected physiological data in the ICU. Methods: This derivation study was conducted using data from a prospective observational cohort of eligible patients admitted to the ICU in Lévis, Québec, Canada. We included patients admitted to the ICU between October 2021 and June 2022 who were aged ≥18 years and had an anticipated ICU stay of ≥48 hours. ICU nurses identified hypovigilant states every hour using the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) or the Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS). Routine vital signs (heart rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation), as well as other physiological and clinical variables (premature ventricular contractions, intubation, use of sedative medication, and temperature), were automatically collected and stored using a CARESCAPE Gateway (General Electric) or manually collected (for sociodemographic characteristics and medication) through chart review. Time series were generated around hypovigilance episodes for analysis. Random Forest, XGBoost, and Light Gradient Boosting Machine classifiers were then used to detect hypovigilant episodes based on time series analysis. Hyperparameter optimization was performed using a random search in a 10-fold group-based cross-validation setup. To interpret the predictions of the best-performing models, we conducted a Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) analysis. We report the results of this study using the TRIPOD+AI (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis for machine learning models) guidelines, and potential biases were assessed using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool). Results: Out of 136 potentially eligible participants, data from 30 patients (mean age 69 y, 63% male) were collected for analysis. Among all participants, 30% were admitted to the ICU for surgical reasons. Following data preprocessing, the study included 1493 hypovigilance episodes and 764 nonhypovigilant episodes. Among the 3 models evaluated, Light Gradient Boosting Machine demonstrated the best performance. It achieved an average accuracy of 68% to detect hypovigilant episodes, with a precision of 76%, a recall of 74%, an area under the curve (AUC) of 60%, and an F1-score of 69%. SHAP analysis revealed that intubation status, respiratory rate, and noninvasive systolic blood pressure were the primary drivers of the model's predictions. Conclusions: All classifiers produced precision and recall values that show potential for further development, with slightly different yet comparable performances in classifying hypovigilant episodes. Machine learning algorithms designed to detect hypovigilance have the potential to support early detection of hypoactive delirium in patients in the ICU.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AISame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207