{"title":"用于败血症预测的机器学习算法的诊断性能:最新荟萃分析。","authors":"Hongru Zhang, Chen Wang, Ning Yang","doi":"10.3233/THC-240087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early identification of sepsis has been shown to significantly improve patient prognosis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of machine-learning algorithms for sepsis prediction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases, covering literature up to December 2023. The keywords included machine learning, sepsis and prediction. After screening, data were extracted and analysed from studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Key evaluation metrics included sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) for diagnostic accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies with a data sample size of 4,158,941. Overall, the pooled sensitivity was 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70-0.90; P< 0.001; I2= 99.7%), the specificity was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.86-0.94; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.91-0.96). The subgroup analysis revealed that in the emergency department setting (6 studies), the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI = 0.68-0.87; P< 0.001; I2= 99.6%), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.97; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.92-0.96). In the Intensive Care Unit setting (11 studies), the sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.75-0.97; P< 0.001; I2= 98.3%), the specificity was 0.85 (95% CI = 0.75-0.92; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.93 (95% CI = 0.91-0.95). Due to the limited number of studies in the in-hospital and mixed settings (n< 3), no pooled analysis was performed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Machine-learning algorithms have demonstrated excellent diagnostic accuracy in predicting the occurrence of sepsis, showing potential for clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic performance of machine-learning algorithms for sepsis prediction: An updated meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Hongru Zhang, Chen Wang, Ning Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/THC-240087\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early identification of sepsis has been shown to significantly improve patient prognosis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of machine-learning algorithms for sepsis prediction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases, covering literature up to December 2023. The keywords included machine learning, sepsis and prediction. After screening, data were extracted and analysed from studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Key evaluation metrics included sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) for diagnostic accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies with a data sample size of 4,158,941. Overall, the pooled sensitivity was 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70-0.90; P< 0.001; I2= 99.7%), the specificity was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.86-0.94; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.91-0.96). The subgroup analysis revealed that in the emergency department setting (6 studies), the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI = 0.68-0.87; P< 0.001; I2= 99.6%), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.97; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.92-0.96). In the Intensive Care Unit setting (11 studies), the sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.75-0.97; P< 0.001; I2= 98.3%), the specificity was 0.85 (95% CI = 0.75-0.92; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.93 (95% CI = 0.91-0.95). Due to the limited number of studies in the in-hospital and mixed settings (n< 3), no pooled analysis was performed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Machine-learning algorithms have demonstrated excellent diagnostic accuracy in predicting the occurrence of sepsis, showing potential for clinical application.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-240087\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-240087","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:早期识别败血症可显著改善患者预后:脓毒症的早期识别已被证明能显著改善患者的预后:因此,本荟萃分析旨在系统评估脓毒症预测机器学习算法的诊断效果:在 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 数据库中进行了系统检索,涵盖截至 2023 年 12 月的文献。关键词包括机器学习、败血症和预测。经过筛选,从符合纳入标准的研究中提取数据并进行分析。主要评价指标包括灵敏度、特异性和诊断准确性曲线下面积(AUC):荟萃分析共纳入 21 项研究,数据样本量为 4,158,941 个。总体而言,汇总灵敏度为 0.82(95% 置信区间 [CI] = 0.70-0.90;P< 0.001;I2=99.7%),特异度为 0.91(95% CI = 0.86-0.94;P< 0.001;I2=99.9%),AUC 为 0.94(95% CI = 0.91-0.96)。亚组分析显示,在急诊科环境中(6 项研究),汇总灵敏度为 0.79(95% CI = 0.68-0.87;P< 0.001;I2= 99.6%),特异性为 0.94(95% CI 0.90-0.97;P< 0.001;I2= 99.9%),AUC 为 0.94(95% CI = 0.92-0.96)。在重症监护室环境中(11 项研究),灵敏度为 0.91(95% CI = 0.75-0.97;P< 0.001;I2= 98.3%),特异性为 0.85(95% CI = 0.75-0.92;P< 0.001;I2= 99.9%),AUC 为 0.93(95% CI = 0.91-0.95)。由于院内和混合环境中的研究数量有限(n< 3),因此没有进行汇总分析:机器学习算法在预测败血症的发生方面表现出了极高的诊断准确性,显示出了临床应用的潜力。
Diagnostic performance of machine-learning algorithms for sepsis prediction: An updated meta-analysis.
Background: Early identification of sepsis has been shown to significantly improve patient prognosis.
Objective: Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of machine-learning algorithms for sepsis prediction.
Methods: Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases, covering literature up to December 2023. The keywords included machine learning, sepsis and prediction. After screening, data were extracted and analysed from studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Key evaluation metrics included sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) for diagnostic accuracy.
Results: The meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies with a data sample size of 4,158,941. Overall, the pooled sensitivity was 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70-0.90; P< 0.001; I2= 99.7%), the specificity was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.86-0.94; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.91-0.96). The subgroup analysis revealed that in the emergency department setting (6 studies), the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI = 0.68-0.87; P< 0.001; I2= 99.6%), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.97; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.92-0.96). In the Intensive Care Unit setting (11 studies), the sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.75-0.97; P< 0.001; I2= 98.3%), the specificity was 0.85 (95% CI = 0.75-0.92; P< 0.001; I2= 99.9%), and the AUC was 0.93 (95% CI = 0.91-0.95). Due to the limited number of studies in the in-hospital and mixed settings (n< 3), no pooled analysis was performed.
Conclusion: Machine-learning algorithms have demonstrated excellent diagnostic accuracy in predicting the occurrence of sepsis, showing potential for clinical application.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.