MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996039046

Preventing catastrophes through PPG: feature extraction and critical event prediction from an ICU patient cohort

2021· article· en· W6996039046 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Theses and Dissertations Repository (University of Pisa) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101DysgeusiaDiafiltrationLiquationEmperipolesisTriacetinDurvalumab
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning is steadily changing healthcare around the world, from smartwatches monitoring health behavior to NLP applications for automated diagnosis. Within this wide field of research, one promising subfield is represented by bedside applications in hospital’s intensive care units (ICUs). ICUs monitor closely the physiological state of a critical patient and some hospitals have started collecting data and researching for a way to assist the complex task of caring for a critical patient. One of these hospitals is the Sick Children Hospital of Toronto, which is collaborating to this thesis project. Together with Sick Children’s doctors we selected a cohort of ICU patients derived from MIT’s MIMIC-III database, singled out the PPG (photoplethysmogram) waveform signal and performed feature engineering in order to apply prediction models for critical events, such as circulatory failure. Other than trying to predict critical events the thesis aims to understand whether feature engineering in the medical context is still useful, given the automated feature extraction capabilities of modern ML techniques.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic Theses and Dissertations Repository (University of Pisa)Same topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207