15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Machine learning vs. traditional regression analysis for fluid overload prediction in the ICU

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Fluid overload, while common in the ICU and associated with serious sequelae, is hard to predict and may be influenced by ICU medication use. Machine learning (ML) approaches may offer advantages over traditional regression techniques to predict it. We compared the ability of traditional regression techniques and different ML-based modeling approaches to identify clinically meaningful fluid overload predictors. This was a retrospective, observational cohort study of adult patients admitted to an ICU ≥ 72 h between 10/1/2015 and 10/31/2020 with available fluid balance data. Models to predict fluid overload (a positive fluid balance ≥ 10% of the admission body weight) in the 48–72 h after ICU admission were created. Potential patient and medication fluid overload predictor variables (n = 28) were collected at either baseline or 24 h after ICU admission. The optimal traditional logistic regression model was created using backward selection. Supervised, classification-based ML models were trained and optimized, including a meta-modeling approach. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were compared between the traditional and ML fluid prediction models. A total of 49 of the 391 (12.5%) patients developed fluid overload. Among the ML models, the XGBoost model had the highest performance (AUROC 0.78, PPV 0.27, NPV 0.94) for fluid overload prediction. The XGBoost model performed similarly to the final traditional logistic regression model (AUROC 0.70; PPV 0.20, NPV 0.94). Feature importance analysis revealed severity of illness scores and medication-related data were the most important predictors of fluid overload. In the context of our study, ML and traditional models appear to perform similarly to predict fluid overload in the ICU. Baseline severity of illness and ICU medication regimen complexity are important predictors of fluid overload.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Support-vector networks

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Artificial Intelligence Clinician learns optimal treatment strategies for sepsis in intensive care

              Sepsis is the third leading cause of death worldwide and the main cause of mortality in hospitals1-3, but the best treatment strategy remains uncertain. In particular, evidence suggests that current practices in the administration of intravenous fluids and vasopressors are suboptimal and likely induce harm in a proportion of patients1,4-6. To tackle this sequential decision-making problem, we developed a reinforcement learning agent, the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Clinician, which extracted implicit knowledge from an amount of patient data that exceeds by many-fold the life-time experience of human clinicians and learned optimal treatment by analyzing a myriad of (mostly suboptimal) treatment decisions. We demonstrate that the value of the AI Clinician's selected treatment is on average reliably higher than human clinicians. In a large validation cohort independent of the training data, mortality was lowest in patients for whom clinicians' actual doses matched the AI decisions. Our model provides individualized and clinically interpretable treatment decisions for sepsis that could improve patient outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                j.devlin@northeastern.edu
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                10 November 2023
                10 November 2023
                2023
                : 13
                : 19654
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Clinical and Administrative Pharmacy, University of Georgia College of Pharmacy, ( https://ror.org/00te3t702) 1120 15th Street, HM-118, Augusta, GA 30912 USA
                [2 ]Department of Statistics, University of Georgia Franklin College of Arts and Sciences, ( https://ror.org/00te3t702) Athens, GA USA
                [3 ]Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, ( https://ror.org/03czfpz43) Atlanta, GA USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.410711.2, ISNI 0000 0001 1034 1720, Department of Pharmacy, , University of North Carolina Medical Center, ; Chapel Hill, NC USA
                [5 ]GRID grid.189967.8, ISNI 0000 0001 0941 6502, Department of Biomedical Informatics, , Emory University School of Medicine, ; Atlanta, GA USA
                [6 ]Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, ( https://ror.org/01zkghx44) Atlanta, GA USA
                [7 ]LaJolla Pharmaceuticals, Waltham, USA
                [8 ]Department of Pharmacy, Oregon Health and Science University, ( https://ror.org/009avj582) Portland, OR USA
                [9 ]Northeastern University School of Pharmacy, ( https://ror.org/04t5xt781) Boston, MA USA
                [10 ]Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, ( https://ror.org/04b6nzv94) Boston, MA USA
                Article
                46735
                10.1038/s41598-023-46735-3
                10638304
                37949982
                73165187-a855-4141-a709-9f5b9e215d55
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 1 June 2023
                : 4 November 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
                Award ID: R21HS028485
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer Nature Limited 2023

                Uncategorized
                health care,translational research
                Uncategorized
                health care, translational research

                Comments

                Comment on this article