IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0206862.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal intensive care outcome prediction over time using machine learning

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher Meiring
  • Abhishek Dixit
  • Steve Harris
  • Niall S MacCallum
  • David A Brealey
  • Peter J Watkinson
  • Andrew Jones
  • Simon Ashworth
  • Richard Beale
  • Stephen J Brett
  • Mervyn Singer
  • Ari Ercole

Abstract

Background: Prognostication is an essential tool for risk adjustment and decision making in the intensive care unit (ICU). Research into prognostication in ICU has so far been limited to data from admission or the first 24 hours. Most ICU admissions last longer than this, decisions are made throughout an admission, and some admissions are explicitly intended as time-limited prognostic trials. Despite this, temporal changes in prognostic ability during ICU admission has received little attention to date. Current predictive models, in the form of prognostic clinical tools, are typically derived from linear models and do not explicitly handle incremental information from trends. Machine learning (ML) allows predictive models to be developed which use non-linear predictors and complex interactions between variables, thus allowing incorporation of trends in measured variables over time; this has made it possible to investigate prognosis throughout an admission. Methods and findings: This study uses ML to assess the predictability of ICU mortality as a function of time. Logistic regression against physiological data alone outperformed APACHE-II and demonstrated several important interactions including between lactate & noradrenaline dose, between lactate & MAP, and between age & MAP consistent with the current sepsis definitions. ML models consistently outperformed logistic regression with Deep Learning giving the best results. Predictive power was maximal on the second day and was further improved by incorporating trend data. Using a limited range of physiological and demographic variables, the best machine learning model on the first day showed an area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.883 (σ = 0.008), compared to 0.846 (σ = 0.010) for a logistic regression from the same predictors and 0.836 (σ = 0.007) for a logistic regression based on the APACHE-II score. Adding information gathered on the second day of admission improved the maximum AUC to 0.895 (σ = 0.008). Beyond the second day, predictive ability declined. Conclusion: This has implications for decision making in intensive care and provides a justification for time-limited trials of ICU therapy; the assessment of prognosis over more than one day may be a valuable strategy as new information on the second day helps to differentiate outcomes. New ML models based on trend data beyond the first day could greatly improve upon current risk stratification tools.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher Meiring & Abhishek Dixit & Steve Harris & Niall S MacCallum & David A Brealey & Peter J Watkinson & Andrew Jones & Simon Ashworth & Richard Beale & Stephen J Brett & Mervyn Singer & Ari Er, 2018. "Optimal intensive care outcome prediction over time using machine learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0206862
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206862
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206862&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0206862?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:pone00:0206862. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.