IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v347y2025i2d10.1007_s10479-024-06226-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Leveraging interpretable machine learning in intensive care

Author

Listed:
  • Lasse Bohlen

    (Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg)

  • Julian Rosenberger

    (Universität Regensburg)

  • Patrick Zschech

    (Universität Leipzig)

  • Mathias Kraus

    (Universität Regensburg)

Abstract

In healthcare, especially within intensive care units (ICU), informed decision-making by medical professionals is crucial due to the complexity of medical data. Healthcare analytics seeks to support these decisions by generating accurate predictions through advanced machine learning (ML) models, such as boosted decision trees and random forests. While these models frequently exhibit accurate predictions across various medical tasks, they often lack interpretability. To address this challenge, researchers have developed interpretable ML models that balance accuracy and interpretability. In this study, we evaluate the performance gap between interpretable and black-box models in two healthcare prediction tasks, mortality and length-of-stay prediction in ICU settings. We focus specifically on the family of generalized additive models (GAMs) as powerful interpretable ML models. Our assessment uses the publicly available Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care dataset, and we analyze the models based on (i) predictive performance, (ii) the influence of compact feature sets (i.e., only few features) on predictive performance, and (iii) interpretability and consistency with medical knowledge. Our results show that interpretable models achieve competitive performance, with a minor decrease of 0.2–0.9 percentage points in area under the receiver operating characteristic relative to state-of-the-art black-box models, while preserving complete interpretability. This remains true even for parsimonious models that use only 2.2 % of patient features. Our study highlights the potential of interpretable models to improve decision-making in ICUs by providing medical professionals with easily understandable and verifiable predictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Lasse Bohlen & Julian Rosenberger & Patrick Zschech & Mathias Kraus, 2025. "Leveraging interpretable machine learning in intensive care," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 347(2), pages 1093-1132, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:347:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-024-06226-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-024-06226-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-024-06226-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-024-06226-8?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. M. Malik & S. Abdallah & M. Ala’raj, 2018. "Data mining and predictive analytics applications for the delivery of healthcare services: a systematic literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 270(1), pages 287-312, November.
    2. Jonathan G. Richens & Ciarán M. Lee & Saurabh Johri, 2020. "Publisher Correction: Improving the accuracy of medical diagnosis with causal machine learning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-1, December.
    3. Kazim Topuz & Hasmet Uner & Asil Oztekin & Mehmet Bayram Yildirim, 2018. "Predicting pediatric clinic no-shows: a decision analytic framework using elastic net and Bayesian belief network," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 263(1), pages 479-499, April.
    4. Anton Kocheturov & Panos M. Pardalos & Athanasia Karakitsiou, 2019. "Massive datasets and machine learning for computational biomedicine: trends and challenges," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 276(1), pages 5-34, May.
    5. Jonathan G. Richens & Ciarán M. Lee & Saurabh Johri, 2020. "Improving the accuracy of medical diagnosis with causal machine learning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Kraus, Mathias & Tschernutter, Daniel & Weinzierl, Sven & Zschech, Patrick, 2024. "Interpretable generalized additive neural networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(2), pages 303-316.
    7. Jie Bai & Andreas Fügener & Jan Schoenfelder & Jens O. Brunner, 2018. "Operations research in intensive care unit management: a literature review," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-24, March.
    8. Marina Johnson & Abdullah Albizri & Serhat Simsek, 2022. "Artificial intelligence in healthcare operations to enhance treatment outcomes: a framework to predict lung cancer prognosis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 308(1), pages 275-305, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marina Johnson & Abdullah Albizri & Serhat Simsek, 2022. "Artificial intelligence in healthcare operations to enhance treatment outcomes: a framework to predict lung cancer prognosis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 308(1), pages 275-305, January.
    2. Seou Choi & Yannick Salamin & Charles Roques-Carmes & Rumen Dangovski & Di Luo & Zhuo Chen & Michael Horodynski & Jamison Sloan & Shiekh Zia Uddin & Marin Soljačić, 2024. "Photonic probabilistic machine learning using quantum vacuum noise," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-8, December.
    3. Renu Sabharwal & Shah J. Miah & Samuel Fosso Wamba, 2025. "Extending artificial intelligence research in the clinical domain: a theoretical perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 348(3), pages 1713-1744, May.
    4. Alexander Lavin & Ciarán M. Gilligan-Lee & Alessya Visnjic & Siddha Ganju & Dava Newman & Sujoy Ganguly & Danny Lange & Atílím Güneş Baydin & Amit Sharma & Adam Gibson & Stephan Zheng & Eric P. Xing &, 2022. "Technology readiness levels for machine learning systems," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Bangfeng Wang & Yiwei Li & Mengfan Zhou & Yulong Han & Mingyu Zhang & Zhaolong Gao & Zetai Liu & Peng Chen & Wei Du & Xingcai Zhang & Xiaojun Feng & Bi-Feng Liu, 2023. "Smartphone-based platforms implementing microfluidic detection with image-based artificial intelligence," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Forney Andrew & Mueller Scott, 2022. "Causal inference in AI education: A primer," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 141-173, January.
    7. Murtaza Nasir & Nichalin Summerfield & Ali Dag & Asil Oztekin, 2020. "A service analytic approach to studying patient no-shows," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 14(2), pages 287-313, June.
    8. Matteo Cinelli & Valerio Ficcadenti & Jessica Riccioni, 2020. "The interconnectedness of the economic content in the speeches of the US Presidents," Papers 2002.07880, arXiv.org.
    9. Katerina Rigana & Ernst C. Wit & Samantha Cook, 2024. "Navigating Market Turbulence: Insights from Causal Network Contagion Value at Risk," Papers 2402.06032, arXiv.org.
    10. Shilin Zheng & Mengdan Li, 2022. "Does aggressive tweeting by the government help to control the COVID‐19 outbreak? Evidence from China," Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 691-713, October.
    11. Elisa Ferrari & Luna Gargani & Greta Barbieri & Lorenzo Ghiadoni & Francesco Faita & Davide Bacciu, 2022. "A causal learning framework for the analysis and interpretation of COVID-19 clinical data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-21, May.
    12. Matteo Cinelli & Valerio Ficcadenti & Jessica Riccioni, 2021. "The interconnectedness of the economic content in the speeches of the US Presidents," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 299(1), pages 593-615, April.
    13. Raafat M Munshi, 2024. "Novel ensemble learning approach with SVM-imputed ADASYN features for enhanced cervical cancer prediction," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(1), pages 1-20, January.
    14. Imran Ali & Devika Kannan, 2022. "Mapping research on healthcare operations and supply chain management: a topic modelling-based literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 29-55, August.
    15. Jenny Morales & Fabián Silva-Aravena & Paula Saez, 2024. "Reducing Waiting Times to Improve Patient Satisfaction: A Hybrid Strategy for Decision Support Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-15, November.
    16. Basile, L.J. & Carbonara, N. & Panniello, U. & Pellegrino, R., 2024. "The role of big data analytics in improving the quality of healthcare services in the Italian context: The mediating role of risk management," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    17. Mi Young Suk & Bomgyeol Kim & Sang Gyu Lee & Chang Hoon You & Tae Hyun Kim, 2021. "Evaluation of Patient No-Shows in a Tertiary Hospital: Focusing on Modes of Appointment-Making and Type of Appointment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-14, March.
    18. Kazim Topuz & Behrooz Davazdahemami & Dursun Delen, 2024. "A Bayesian belief network-based analytics methodology for early-stage risk detection of novel diseases," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 341(1), pages 673-697, October.
    19. Kanchan Jha & Sriparna Saha & Pratik Dutta, 2024. "Incorporation of gene ontology in identification of protein interactions from biomedical corpus: a multi-modal approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 339(3), pages 1793-1811, August.
    20. Simsek, Serhat & Dag, Ali & Tiahrt, Thomas & Oztekin, Asil, 2021. "A Bayesian Belief Network-based probabilistic mechanism to determine patient no-show risk categories," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    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:spr:annopr:v:347:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-024-06226-8. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.