MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413977425 · doi:10.2196/82230

Machine Learning-Augmented Traditional Analysis: Lactate versus Lactate-to-Albumin Ratio in Predicting Mortality Risk among Septic Patients — A Large-scale Retrospective Study (Preprint)

2025· article· en· W4413977425 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yi Xu, Weijun Xiao, Peng Dou, Huang Yunxia, Cao Muhan, Liang Luo, HU Qing-hua

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintScale (ratio)AlbuminRetrospective cohort studyMedicineInternal medicineComputer scienceGeographyWorld Wide WebCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Effective risk stratification in sepsis remains a clinical challenge. While lactate is a cornerstone biomarker, its predictive limitations are well-known. The lactate-to-albumin ratio (LAR) has emerged as a promising alternative, but its superiority, particularly in patients without severe hyperlactatemia, has not been rigorously validated in a large cohort using advanced, transparent methodologies. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> To determine whether the lactate-to-albumin ratio (LAR) provides superior and more robust prediction of 28-day mortality than lactate alone in adult sepsis patients, through comprehensive analysis using threshold effects, restricted cubic splines, and interpretable machine learning models in a large multicenter cohort. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> We conducted a retrospective analysis of 3637 adult sepsis patients from the multicenter eICU database. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. We employed a dual approach: 1. Traditional statistical analyses, including threshold and restricted cubic spline modeling, to compare the predictive behavior of lactate and LAR. 2. Development of nine machine learning models to assess their predictive performance. We used SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to provide full model interpretability and to quantify the precise predictive contribution of each biomarker. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> LAR consistently demonstrated a stronger and more stable association with mortality than lactate, especially in patients with lactate levels &lt;4 mmol/L. In machine learning analyses, the top-performing Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model achieved an AUC of 0.71 for 28-day in-hospital mortality. Critically, SHAP analysis revealed that LAR was consistently ranked as one of the top three most important predictive features across all models, with a contribution quantitatively greater than that of lactate alone. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> The LAR is a superior and more robust biomarker than lactate for sepsis mortality prediction. By integrating a measure of acute metabolic distress (lactate) with a marker of systemic inflammation and capillary leak (albumin), LAR provides a more comprehensive risk assessment, particularly in the crucial early stages of sepsis. Interpretable machine learning models powered by LAR offer a promising pathway toward more precise and reliable clinical decision support. </sec> <sec> <title>CLINICALTRIAL</title> .Database access complied with the PhysioNet review board's data use agreement and HIPAA Safe Harbor provisions. This study received an exemption from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Institutional Review Board, and the researcher completed the required data access training certification(Xu Yi, Certificate No.66014966). </sec>

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207