院内死亡率预测模型的决策曲线分析:术前和术中数据对决策的相对价值。

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Anesthesia and analgesia Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-05 DOI:10.1213/ANE.0000000000006874
Markus Huber, Corina Bello, Patrick Schober, Mark G Filipovic, Markus M Luedi
{"title":"院内死亡率预测模型的决策曲线分析:术前和术中数据对决策的相对价值。","authors":"Markus Huber, Corina Bello, Patrick Schober, Mark G Filipovic, Markus M Luedi","doi":"10.1213/ANE.0000000000006874","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical prediction modeling plays a pivotal part in modern clinical care, particularly in predicting the risk of in-hospital mortality. Recent modeling efforts have focused on leveraging intraoperative data sources to improve model performance. However, the individual and collective benefit of pre- and intraoperative data for clinical decision-making remains unknown. We hypothesized that pre- and intraoperative predictors contribute equally to the net benefit in a decision curve analysis (DCA) of in-hospital mortality prediction models that include pre- and intraoperative predictors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the VitalDB database featuring a subcohort of 6043 patients were used. A total of 141 predictors for in-hospital mortality were grouped into preoperative (demographics, intervention characteristics, and laboratory measurements) and intraoperative (laboratory and monitor data, drugs, and fluids) data. Prediction models using either preoperative, intraoperative, or all data were developed with multiple methods (logistic regression, neural network, random forest, gradient boosting machine, and a stacked learner). Predictive performance was evaluated by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Clinical utility was examined with a DCA in the predefined risk preference range (denoted by so-called treatment threshold probabilities) between 0% and 20%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>AUROC performance of the prediction models ranged from 0.53 to 0.78. AUPRC values ranged from 0.02 to 0.25 (compared to the incidence of 0.09 in our dataset) and high AUPRC values resulted from prediction models based on preoperative laboratory values. A DCA of pre- and intraoperative prediction models highlighted that preoperative data provide the largest overall benefit for decision-making, whereas intraoperative values provide only limited benefit for decision-making compared to preoperative data. While preoperative demographics, comorbidities, and surgery-related data provide the largest benefit for low treatment thresholds up to 5% to 10%, preoperative laboratory measurements become the dominant source for decision support for higher thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When it comes to predicting in-hospital mortality and subsequent decision-making, preoperative demographics, comorbidities, and surgery-related data provide the largest benefit for clinicians with risk-averse preferences, whereas preoperative laboratory values provide the largest benefit for decision-makers with more moderate risk preferences. Our decision-analytic investigation of different predictor categories moves beyond the question of whether certain predictors provide a benefit in traditional performance metrics (eg, AUROC). It offers a nuanced perspective on for whom these predictors might be beneficial in clinical decision-making. Follow-up studies requiring larger datasets and dedicated deep-learning models to handle continuous intraoperative data are essential to examine the robustness of our results.</p>","PeriodicalId":7784,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and analgesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision Curve Analysis of In-Hospital Mortality Prediction Models: The Relative Value of Pre- and Intraoperative Data For Decision-Making.\",\"authors\":\"Markus Huber, Corina Bello, Patrick Schober, Mark G Filipovic, Markus M Luedi\",\"doi\":\"10.1213/ANE.0000000000006874\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical prediction modeling plays a pivotal part in modern clinical care, particularly in predicting the risk of in-hospital mortality. Recent modeling efforts have focused on leveraging intraoperative data sources to improve model performance. However, the individual and collective benefit of pre- and intraoperative data for clinical decision-making remains unknown. We hypothesized that pre- and intraoperative predictors contribute equally to the net benefit in a decision curve analysis (DCA) of in-hospital mortality prediction models that include pre- and intraoperative predictors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the VitalDB database featuring a subcohort of 6043 patients were used. A total of 141 predictors for in-hospital mortality were grouped into preoperative (demographics, intervention characteristics, and laboratory measurements) and intraoperative (laboratory and monitor data, drugs, and fluids) data. Prediction models using either preoperative, intraoperative, or all data were developed with multiple methods (logistic regression, neural network, random forest, gradient boosting machine, and a stacked learner). Predictive performance was evaluated by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Clinical utility was examined with a DCA in the predefined risk preference range (denoted by so-called treatment threshold probabilities) between 0% and 20%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>AUROC performance of the prediction models ranged from 0.53 to 0.78. AUPRC values ranged from 0.02 to 0.25 (compared to the incidence of 0.09 in our dataset) and high AUPRC values resulted from prediction models based on preoperative laboratory values. A DCA of pre- and intraoperative prediction models highlighted that preoperative data provide the largest overall benefit for decision-making, whereas intraoperative values provide only limited benefit for decision-making compared to preoperative data. While preoperative demographics, comorbidities, and surgery-related data provide the largest benefit for low treatment thresholds up to 5% to 10%, preoperative laboratory measurements become the dominant source for decision support for higher thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When it comes to predicting in-hospital mortality and subsequent decision-making, preoperative demographics, comorbidities, and surgery-related data provide the largest benefit for clinicians with risk-averse preferences, whereas preoperative laboratory values provide the largest benefit for decision-makers with more moderate risk preferences. Our decision-analytic investigation of different predictor categories moves beyond the question of whether certain predictors provide a benefit in traditional performance metrics (eg, AUROC). It offers a nuanced perspective on for whom these predictors might be beneficial in clinical decision-making. Follow-up studies requiring larger datasets and dedicated deep-learning models to handle continuous intraoperative data are essential to examine the robustness of our results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anesthesia and analgesia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anesthesia and analgesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000006874\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000006874","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床预测建模在现代临床护理中起着举足轻重的作用,尤其是在预测院内死亡风险方面。近期建模工作的重点是利用术中数据源来提高模型性能。然而,术前和术中数据对临床决策的个体和集体益处仍是未知数。我们假设,在包含术前和术中预测指标的院内死亡率预测模型的决策曲线分析(DCA)中,术前和术中预测指标对净效益的贡献相同:方法: 使用了VitalDB数据库中6043名患者的子队列数据。共有 141 项院内死亡率预测因素被归类为术前(人口统计学、干预特征和实验室测量)和术中(实验室和监护仪数据、药物和液体)数据。使用多种方法(逻辑回归、神经网络、随机森林、梯度提升机和堆叠学习器)开发了使用术前、术中或所有数据的预测模型。预测性能通过接收者操作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)和精确度-召回曲线下面积(AUPRC)进行评估。在 0% 至 20% 的预定风险偏好范围内(用所谓的治疗阈值概率表示),对 DCA 的临床效用进行了检验:结果:预测模型的 AUROC 性能介于 0.53 和 0.78 之间。AUPRC值从0.02到0.25不等(而我们数据集中的发生率为0.09),基于术前实验室值的预测模型AUPRC值较高。术前预测模型和术中预测模型的 DCA 显示,术前数据对决策的总体益处最大,而与术前数据相比,术中数值对决策的益处有限。虽然术前人口统计学、合并症和手术相关数据能为5%至10%的低治疗阈值提供最大益处,但对于更高的阈值,术前实验室测量结果则成为决策支持的主要来源:结论:就预测院内死亡率和后续决策而言,术前人口统计学、合并症和手术相关数据能为偏好规避风险的临床医生带来最大益处,而术前实验室数值则能为偏好中等风险的决策者带来最大益处。我们对不同预测因子类别的决策分析调查超越了某些预测因子是否能在传统绩效指标(如 AUROC)中获益的问题。它提供了一个细致入微的视角,让我们了解这些预测因子可能对哪些人的临床决策有益。后续研究需要更大的数据集和专门的深度学习模型来处理连续的术中数据,这对检验我们结果的稳健性至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Decision Curve Analysis of In-Hospital Mortality Prediction Models: The Relative Value of Pre- and Intraoperative Data For Decision-Making.

Background: Clinical prediction modeling plays a pivotal part in modern clinical care, particularly in predicting the risk of in-hospital mortality. Recent modeling efforts have focused on leveraging intraoperative data sources to improve model performance. However, the individual and collective benefit of pre- and intraoperative data for clinical decision-making remains unknown. We hypothesized that pre- and intraoperative predictors contribute equally to the net benefit in a decision curve analysis (DCA) of in-hospital mortality prediction models that include pre- and intraoperative predictors.

Methods: Data from the VitalDB database featuring a subcohort of 6043 patients were used. A total of 141 predictors for in-hospital mortality were grouped into preoperative (demographics, intervention characteristics, and laboratory measurements) and intraoperative (laboratory and monitor data, drugs, and fluids) data. Prediction models using either preoperative, intraoperative, or all data were developed with multiple methods (logistic regression, neural network, random forest, gradient boosting machine, and a stacked learner). Predictive performance was evaluated by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Clinical utility was examined with a DCA in the predefined risk preference range (denoted by so-called treatment threshold probabilities) between 0% and 20%.

Results: AUROC performance of the prediction models ranged from 0.53 to 0.78. AUPRC values ranged from 0.02 to 0.25 (compared to the incidence of 0.09 in our dataset) and high AUPRC values resulted from prediction models based on preoperative laboratory values. A DCA of pre- and intraoperative prediction models highlighted that preoperative data provide the largest overall benefit for decision-making, whereas intraoperative values provide only limited benefit for decision-making compared to preoperative data. While preoperative demographics, comorbidities, and surgery-related data provide the largest benefit for low treatment thresholds up to 5% to 10%, preoperative laboratory measurements become the dominant source for decision support for higher thresholds.

Conclusions: When it comes to predicting in-hospital mortality and subsequent decision-making, preoperative demographics, comorbidities, and surgery-related data provide the largest benefit for clinicians with risk-averse preferences, whereas preoperative laboratory values provide the largest benefit for decision-makers with more moderate risk preferences. Our decision-analytic investigation of different predictor categories moves beyond the question of whether certain predictors provide a benefit in traditional performance metrics (eg, AUROC). It offers a nuanced perspective on for whom these predictors might be beneficial in clinical decision-making. Follow-up studies requiring larger datasets and dedicated deep-learning models to handle continuous intraoperative data are essential to examine the robustness of our results.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Anesthesia and analgesia
Anesthesia and analgesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
7.00%
发文量
817
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Anesthesia & Analgesia exists for the benefit of patients under the care of health care professionals engaged in the disciplines broadly related to anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, critical care medicine, and pain medicine. The Journal furthers the care of these patients by reporting the fundamental advances in the science of these clinical disciplines and by documenting the clinical, laboratory, and administrative advances that guide therapy. Anesthesia & Analgesia seeks a balance between definitive clinical and management investigations and outstanding basic scientific reports. The Journal welcomes original manuscripts containing rigorous design and analysis, even if unusual in their approach.
期刊最新文献
A Little Blue Butterfly. A Paradigm for Shared Decision-Making in Pediatric Anesthesia Practice for Children with Autism for the Generalist Clinician. Association Between Two Muscle-Related Parameters and Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Tumor Resection Surgery. Cannabinoids and General Anesthetics: Revisiting Molecular Mechanisms of Their Pharmacological Interactions. Consensus Statement on Pain Management for Pregnant Patients with Opioid-Use Disorder from the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine.
×
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