IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pdig00/0001758.html

A machine learning model for in-hospital mortality prediction in patients with sepsis-related myocardial injury

Author

Listed:
  • Da-cheng Wang
  • Yan-pin Liu
  • Yu-ting Wang
  • Xiao-huan Zhuang
  • Xiao-peng Yin
  • Xin-yuan Zhang
  • Yan Zhuang

Abstract

Sepsis-related myocardial injury (SRMI) is associated with high mortality, but the transportability of prediction models across heterogeneous cohorts remains uncertain. We developed and externally validated a machine learning model for in-hospital mortality prediction in SRMI and evaluated its discrimination, calibration, interpretability, and distributional shift across cohorts. Using MIMIC-IV for development and MIMIC-III and a local cohort for external validation (n = 1,226, 962, and 280, respectively), we compared eight classification algorithms. A two-stage feature-selection strategy, recursive feature accumulation and sequential elimination with incremental feature evaluation, ranked 31 candidate variables to derive a parsimonious predictor set. The selected model was evaluated for discrimination, precision-recall performance, calibration, clinical utility, and risk stratification. Logistic recalibration, population stability index (PSI) analysis, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were used to assess probability alignment, cross-cohort distributional shift, and model interpretability. Feature selection reduced 31 candidate variables to 8 predictors with little loss of cross-validated performance (AUC, 0.819 with 31 variables versus 0.810 with 8 variables). The selected random forest model achieved an AUC of 0.819 (bootstrap 95% CI, 0.787-0.848) and a PR-AUC of 0.702 (0.657-0.751) in MIMIC-III, and an AUC of 0.758 (0.693-0.816) and a PR-AUC of 0.525 (0.435-0.630) in the local cohort. Recalibration reduced the Brier score from 0.162 to 0.147 in MIMIC-III and from 0.233 to 0.196 in the local cohort. PSI indicated minimal distributional shift between MIMIC-IV and MIMIC-III but substantial shift in the local cohort, particularly for SOFA score, respiratory rate, and prothrombin time. SHAP identified prothrombin time, invasive ventilation, lactate, temperature, and urine output as major contributors to model predictions. In two external cohorts, an 8-variable random forest model showed moderate discrimination for mortality prediction in SRMI. The evaluation of external performance, calibration, distributional shift, and SHAP-based explanations provides an assessment of model transportability. Prospective validation is needed before clinical deployment.Author summary: Sepsis can damage the heart and is associated with a high risk of death in intensive care. Clinicians need practical ways to identify patients with sepsis-related myocardial injury who may need closer monitoring after the first day in the intensive care unit. We developed a prediction model using routinely collected information from the first 24 hours of ICU care, including age, illness severity, breathing support, urine output, vital signs, lactate, and prothrombin time. We developed the model in one large critical-care database and tested it in a second database and an independent local hospital cohort. The model showed moderate ability to distinguish survivors from non-survivors in both external cohorts. We also assessed whether its predicted risks were well calibrated, how patient characteristics differed between hospitals, and which variables contributed most to predictions. The model is intended to support early risk stratification, not to replace clinical judgment or established severity scores. Because the local cohort was small and the study was retrospective, prospective multicenter validation and local assessment are needed before clinical use.

Suggested Citation

  • Da-cheng Wang & Yan-pin Liu & Yu-ting Wang & Xiao-huan Zhuang & Xiao-peng Yin & Xin-yuan Zhang & Yan Zhuang, 2026. "A machine learning model for in-hospital mortality prediction in patients with sepsis-related myocardial injury," PLOS Digital Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-21, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pdig00:0001758
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0001758
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0001758
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0001758&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pdig.0001758?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pdig00:0001758. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: digitalhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.