Prediction of Intensive Care Length of Stay for Surviving and Nonsurviving Patients Using Deep Learning.

IF 7.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Critical Care Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-07 DOI:10.1097/CCM.0000000000006588
Ludmila Brochini, Xinggang Liu, Louis Atallah, Pamela Amelung, Robin French, Omar Badawi
{"title":"Prediction of Intensive Care Length of Stay for Surviving and Nonsurviving Patients Using Deep Learning.","authors":"Ludmila Brochini, Xinggang Liu, Louis Atallah, Pamela Amelung, Robin French, Omar Badawi","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Length of stay (LOS) models support evaluating ICU care; however, current benchmarking models fail to consider differences in LOS between surviving and nonsurviving patients, which can lead to biased predictions toward the surviving population. We aim to develop a model addressing this as well as documentation bias to improve ICU benchmarking.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>The Critical Care Outcomes Prediction Model (CCOPM) LOS uses patient characteristics, vitals, and laboratories during the first 24 hours of ICU admission to predict LOS in the hospital and ICU using a deep learning framework for modeling time to events with competing risk. Data was randomly divided into training, validation, and test (hold out) sets in a 2:1:1 ratio.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Electronic ICU Research Institute database from participating tele-critical care programs.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Six hundred sixty-nine thousand eight hundred seventy-six ICU admissions pertaining to 628,815 patients from 329 ICUs in 194 U.S. hospitals, from 2017 to 2019.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>None.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>Model performance was assessed using the coefficient of determination (R2), concordance index, mean absolute error, and calibration. For individual stays in the test set, the ICU LOS model presented R2 = 0.29 and 0.23 for surviving and nonsurviving populations, respectively, at the individual level and R2 = 0.48 and 0.23 at the ICU level. Conversely, hospital LOS model presented R2 = 0.46 and 0.52 at the individual level and R2 = 0.71 and 0.64 at the ICU level. In the subset of the test set containing predictions from Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IVb, R2 of ICU LOS for surviving and nonsurviving populations was, respectively, 0.30 and 0.23 for the CCOPM and 0.16 and zero for APACHE IVb. For hospital LOS, the values were R2 = 0.39 and 0.40 for the CCOPM and 0.27 and zero for APACHE IVb.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This novel LOS model represents a step forward in achieving more equitable benchmarking across diverse ICU settings with varying risk profiles.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006588","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Length of stay (LOS) models support evaluating ICU care; however, current benchmarking models fail to consider differences in LOS between surviving and nonsurviving patients, which can lead to biased predictions toward the surviving population. We aim to develop a model addressing this as well as documentation bias to improve ICU benchmarking.

Design: The Critical Care Outcomes Prediction Model (CCOPM) LOS uses patient characteristics, vitals, and laboratories during the first 24 hours of ICU admission to predict LOS in the hospital and ICU using a deep learning framework for modeling time to events with competing risk. Data was randomly divided into training, validation, and test (hold out) sets in a 2:1:1 ratio.

Setting: Electronic ICU Research Institute database from participating tele-critical care programs.

Patients: Six hundred sixty-nine thousand eight hundred seventy-six ICU admissions pertaining to 628,815 patients from 329 ICUs in 194 U.S. hospitals, from 2017 to 2019.

Interventions: None.

Measurements and main results: Model performance was assessed using the coefficient of determination (R2), concordance index, mean absolute error, and calibration. For individual stays in the test set, the ICU LOS model presented R2 = 0.29 and 0.23 for surviving and nonsurviving populations, respectively, at the individual level and R2 = 0.48 and 0.23 at the ICU level. Conversely, hospital LOS model presented R2 = 0.46 and 0.52 at the individual level and R2 = 0.71 and 0.64 at the ICU level. In the subset of the test set containing predictions from Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IVb, R2 of ICU LOS for surviving and nonsurviving populations was, respectively, 0.30 and 0.23 for the CCOPM and 0.16 and zero for APACHE IVb. For hospital LOS, the values were R2 = 0.39 and 0.40 for the CCOPM and 0.27 and zero for APACHE IVb.

Conclusions: This novel LOS model represents a step forward in achieving more equitable benchmarking across diverse ICU settings with varying risk profiles.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用深度学习预测存活和未存活患者的重症监护住院时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care Medicine
Critical Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
728
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed, scientific publication in critical care medicine. Directed to those specialists who treat patients in the ICU and CCU, including chest physicians, surgeons, pediatricians, pharmacists/pharmacologists, anesthesiologists, critical care nurses, and other healthcare professionals, Critical Care Medicine covers all aspects of acute and emergency care for the critically ill or injured patient. Each issue presents critical care practitioners with clinical breakthroughs that lead to better patient care, the latest news on promising research, and advances in equipment and techniques.
期刊最新文献
Lactated Ringer's or Normal Saline for Initial Fluid Resuscitation in Sepsis-Induced Hypotension. The Association Between Body Mass Index and Mortality Mediated by Medical and Mechanical Complications in Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. How Long Should Patients Be Treated With Postcardiotomy Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation? Individual Patient Data Pooled Analysis. Geospatial Access to Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the United States. Nelonemdaz Treatment in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: The Quest for the Grail Continues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1