Early prediction of shock in intensive care unit patients by machine learning using discrete electronic health record data

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of critical care Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-22 DOI:10.1016/j.jcrc.2025.155093
Jacob C. Jentzer , Shrinath Patel , Ognjen Gajic , Vitaly Herasevich , Francisco Lopez-Jimenez , Dennis H. Murphree , Parag C. Patel , Kianoush B. Kashani
{"title":"Early prediction of shock in intensive care unit patients by machine learning using discrete electronic health record data","authors":"Jacob C. Jentzer ,&nbsp;Shrinath Patel ,&nbsp;Ognjen Gajic ,&nbsp;Vitaly Herasevich ,&nbsp;Francisco Lopez-Jimenez ,&nbsp;Dennis H. Murphree ,&nbsp;Parag C. Patel ,&nbsp;Kianoush B. Kashani","doi":"10.1016/j.jcrc.2025.155093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To use machine learning to predict new-onset shock for at-risk intensive care unit (ICU) patients based on discrete vital sign data from the electronic health record.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and results</h3><div>We included 11,305 adult cardiac, medical, neurological, and surgical ICU patients who did not have shock within 4 h of ICU admission. We used routine vital sign data collected from the first 4 h of the ICU stay to predict new-onset shock within the subsequent 4 h. We compared logistic regression with machine learning models including elastic net, random forest, boosted trees and extreme gradient boosting (XGB). Median age was 64.0 years (44.5 % females). New-onset shock after 4 h developed in 483 (4.3 %) patients, and these patients had higher ICU (8.5 % vs. 1.9 %) and in-hospital (14.3 % vs. 5.0 %) mortality. Standard logistic regression had limited discrimination for new-onset shock, with the best single predictors being the maximum shock index and the minimum blood pressure during the second 2 h of the ICU stay. Discrimination in the validation cohort (<em>n</em> = 2826) was better for each ML model: elastic net, 0.76; boosted tree, 0.76; random forest, 0.79; XGB, 0.82; each model had ≥ 98 % negative predictive value. Accuracy was highest (81 %) with XGB, although positive predictive value was only 14 %. The XGB model also predicted in-hospital mortality with good discrimination.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Machine learning prediction models can achieve very good discrimination and accuracy for new-onset shock in ICU patients using vital sign data within 4 h after ICU admission.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15451,"journal":{"name":"Journal of critical care","volume":"88 ","pages":"Article 155093"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of critical care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944125000802","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To use machine learning to predict new-onset shock for at-risk intensive care unit (ICU) patients based on discrete vital sign data from the electronic health record.

Methods and results

We included 11,305 adult cardiac, medical, neurological, and surgical ICU patients who did not have shock within 4 h of ICU admission. We used routine vital sign data collected from the first 4 h of the ICU stay to predict new-onset shock within the subsequent 4 h. We compared logistic regression with machine learning models including elastic net, random forest, boosted trees and extreme gradient boosting (XGB). Median age was 64.0 years (44.5 % females). New-onset shock after 4 h developed in 483 (4.3 %) patients, and these patients had higher ICU (8.5 % vs. 1.9 %) and in-hospital (14.3 % vs. 5.0 %) mortality. Standard logistic regression had limited discrimination for new-onset shock, with the best single predictors being the maximum shock index and the minimum blood pressure during the second 2 h of the ICU stay. Discrimination in the validation cohort (n = 2826) was better for each ML model: elastic net, 0.76; boosted tree, 0.76; random forest, 0.79; XGB, 0.82; each model had ≥ 98 % negative predictive value. Accuracy was highest (81 %) with XGB, although positive predictive value was only 14 %. The XGB model also predicted in-hospital mortality with good discrimination.

Conclusions

Machine learning prediction models can achieve very good discrimination and accuracy for new-onset shock in ICU patients using vital sign data within 4 h after ICU admission.
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
使用离散电子健康记录数据的机器学习对重症监护病房患者休克的早期预测
目的根据电子健康记录中离散的生命体征数据,利用机器学习预测高危重症监护病房(ICU)患者新发休克的情况。方法和结果我们纳入了 11,305 名入院 4 小时内未发生休克的成人心脏、内科、神经和外科 ICU 患者。我们将逻辑回归与机器学习模型(包括弹性网、随机森林、增强树和极端梯度增强(XGB))进行了比较。中位年龄为 64.0 岁(44.5% 为女性)。4小时后出现新发休克的患者有483人(4.3%),这些患者的重症监护室死亡率(8.5% 对 1.9%)和院内死亡率(14.3% 对 5.0%)均较高。标准逻辑回归对新发休克的识别能力有限,最佳预测指标是休克指数最大值和重症监护室住院后 2 小时内的最低血压。在验证队列(n = 2826)中,每个 ML 模型的识别率都较高:弹性网,0.76;增强树,0.76;随机森林,0.79;XGB,0.82;每个模型的阴性预测值都≥ 98%。XGB 的准确率最高(81%),但阳性预测值仅为 14%。结论机器学习预测模型可以利用 ICU 患者入院后 4 小时内的生命体征数据,对 ICU 患者新发休克进行很好的判别并获得很高的准确性。
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
Journal of critical care
Journal of critical care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
2.70%
发文量
237
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Critical Care, the official publication of the World Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine (WFSICCM), is a leading international, peer-reviewed journal providing original research, review articles, tutorials, and invited articles for physicians and allied health professionals involved in treating the critically ill. The Journal aims to improve patient care by furthering understanding of health systems research and its integration into clinical practice. The Journal will include articles which discuss: All aspects of health services research in critical care System based practice in anesthesiology, perioperative and critical care medicine The interface between anesthesiology, critical care medicine and pain Integrating intraoperative management in preparation for postoperative critical care management and recovery Optimizing patient management, i.e., exploring the interface between evidence-based principles or clinical insight into management and care of complex patients The team approach in the OR and ICU System-based research Medical ethics Technology in medicine Seminars discussing current, state of the art, and sometimes controversial topics in anesthesiology, critical care medicine, and professional education Residency Education.
期刊最新文献
Early hemodynamic phenotyping in sepsis using transthoracic echocardiography: A proof-of-concept study in a north African ICU Green intensive care in an upper-middle-income country: A national survey of awareness, practices and barriers among ICU physicians in Turkey The “gray zone” of intensive care: ICU admission beyond a binary decision Discontinuation of continuous kidney replacement therapy in patients with acute kidney injury: A pilot study Major publications in the critical care pharmacotherapy literature: 2025
×
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:604180095
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