{"title":"利用机器学习预测急诊科分诊阶段 24 小时内的败血症。","authors":"Jingyuan Xie, Jiandong Gao, Mutian Yang, Ting Zhang, Yecheng Liu, Yutong Chen, Zetong Liu, Qimin Mei, Zhimao Li, Huadong Zhu, Ji Wu","doi":"10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2024.074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sepsis is one of the main causes of mortality in intensive care units (ICUs). Early prediction is critical for reducing injury. As approximately 36% of sepsis occur within 24 h after emergency department (ED) admission in Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-IV), a prediction system for the ED triage stage would be helpful. Previous methods such as the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) are more suitable for screening than for prediction in the ED, and we aimed to find a light-weight, convenient prediction method through machine learning.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We accessed the MIMIC-IV for sepsis patient data in the EDs. Our dataset comprised demographic information, vital signs, and synthetic features. Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) was used to predict the risk of developing sepsis within 24 h after ED admission. Additionally, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was employed to provide a comprehensive interpretation of the model's results. Ten percent of the patients were randomly selected as the testing set, while the remaining patients were used for training with 10-fold cross-validation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For 10-fold cross-validation on 14,957 samples, we reached an accuracy of 84.1%±0.3% and an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.92±0.02. The model achieved similar performance on the testing set of 1,662 patients. SHAP values showed that the five most important features were acuity, arrival transportation, age, shock index, and respiratory rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Machine learning models such as XGBoost may be used for sepsis prediction using only a small amount of data conveniently collected in the ED triage stage. This may help reduce workload in the ED and warn medical workers against the risk of sepsis in advance.</p>","PeriodicalId":23685,"journal":{"name":"World journal of emergency medicine","volume":"15 5","pages":"379-385"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11402869/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prediction of sepsis within 24 hours at the triage stage in emergency departments using machine learning.\",\"authors\":\"Jingyuan Xie, Jiandong Gao, Mutian Yang, Ting Zhang, Yecheng Liu, Yutong Chen, Zetong Liu, Qimin Mei, Zhimao Li, Huadong Zhu, Ji Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2024.074\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sepsis is one of the main causes of mortality in intensive care units (ICUs). Early prediction is critical for reducing injury. As approximately 36% of sepsis occur within 24 h after emergency department (ED) admission in Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-IV), a prediction system for the ED triage stage would be helpful. Previous methods such as the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) are more suitable for screening than for prediction in the ED, and we aimed to find a light-weight, convenient prediction method through machine learning.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We accessed the MIMIC-IV for sepsis patient data in the EDs. Our dataset comprised demographic information, vital signs, and synthetic features. Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) was used to predict the risk of developing sepsis within 24 h after ED admission. Additionally, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was employed to provide a comprehensive interpretation of the model's results. Ten percent of the patients were randomly selected as the testing set, while the remaining patients were used for training with 10-fold cross-validation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For 10-fold cross-validation on 14,957 samples, we reached an accuracy of 84.1%±0.3% and an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.92±0.02. The model achieved similar performance on the testing set of 1,662 patients. SHAP values showed that the five most important features were acuity, arrival transportation, age, shock index, and respiratory rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Machine learning models such as XGBoost may be used for sepsis prediction using only a small amount of data conveniently collected in the ED triage stage. This may help reduce workload in the ED and warn medical workers against the risk of sepsis in advance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World journal of emergency medicine\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"379-385\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11402869/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World journal of emergency medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2024.074\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World journal of emergency medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2024.074","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prediction of sepsis within 24 hours at the triage stage in emergency departments using machine learning.
Background: Sepsis is one of the main causes of mortality in intensive care units (ICUs). Early prediction is critical for reducing injury. As approximately 36% of sepsis occur within 24 h after emergency department (ED) admission in Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-IV), a prediction system for the ED triage stage would be helpful. Previous methods such as the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) are more suitable for screening than for prediction in the ED, and we aimed to find a light-weight, convenient prediction method through machine learning.
Methods: We accessed the MIMIC-IV for sepsis patient data in the EDs. Our dataset comprised demographic information, vital signs, and synthetic features. Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) was used to predict the risk of developing sepsis within 24 h after ED admission. Additionally, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was employed to provide a comprehensive interpretation of the model's results. Ten percent of the patients were randomly selected as the testing set, while the remaining patients were used for training with 10-fold cross-validation.
Results: For 10-fold cross-validation on 14,957 samples, we reached an accuracy of 84.1%±0.3% and an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.92±0.02. The model achieved similar performance on the testing set of 1,662 patients. SHAP values showed that the five most important features were acuity, arrival transportation, age, shock index, and respiratory rate.
Conclusion: Machine learning models such as XGBoost may be used for sepsis prediction using only a small amount of data conveniently collected in the ED triage stage. This may help reduce workload in the ED and warn medical workers against the risk of sepsis in advance.
期刊介绍:
The journal will cover technical, clinical and bioengineering studies related to multidisciplinary specialties of emergency medicine, such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation, acute injury, out-of-hospital emergency medical service, intensive care, injury and disease prevention, disaster management, healthy policy and ethics, toxicology, and sudden illness, including cardiology, internal medicine, anesthesiology, orthopedics, and trauma care, and more. The journal also features basic science, special reports, case reports, board review questions, and more. Editorials and communications to the editor explore controversial issues and encourage further discussion by physicians dealing with emergency medicine.