• Anesthesiology · Mar 2023

    Multicenter Study

    Predicting Intensive Care Delirium with Machine Learning: Model Development and External Validation.

    • Kirby D Gong, Ryan Lu, Teya S Bergamaschi, Akaash Sanyal, Joanna Guo, Han B Kim, Hieu T Nguyen, Joseph L Greenstein, Raimond L Winslow, and Robert D Stevens.
    • Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
    • Anesthesiology. 2023 Mar 1; 138 (3): 299311299-311.

    BackgroundDelirium poses significant risks to patients, but countermeasures can be taken to mitigate negative outcomes. Accurately forecasting delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients could guide proactive intervention. Our primary objective was to predict ICU delirium by applying machine learning to clinical and physiologic data routinely collected in electronic health records.MethodsTwo prediction models were trained and tested using a multicenter database (years of data collection 2014 to 2015), and externally validated on two single-center databases (2001 to 2012 and 2008 to 2019). The primary outcome variable was delirium defined as a positive Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU screen, or an Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist of 4 or greater. The first model, named "24-hour model," used data from the 24 h after ICU admission to predict delirium any time afterward. The second model designated "dynamic model," predicted the onset of delirium up to 12 h in advance. Model performance was compared with a widely cited reference model.ResultsFor the 24-h model, delirium was identified in 2,536 of 18,305 (13.9%), 768 of 5,299 (14.5%), and 5,955 of 36,194 (11.9%) of patient stays, respectively, in the development sample and two validation samples. For the 12-h lead time dynamic model, delirium was identified in 3,791 of 22,234 (17.0%), 994 of 6,166 (16.1%), and 5,955 of 28,440 (20.9%) patient stays, respectively. Mean area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) (95% CI) for the first 24-h model was 0.785 (0.769 to 0.801), significantly higher than the modified reference model with AUC of 0.730 (0.704 to 0.757). The dynamic model had a mean AUC of 0.845 (0.831 to 0.859) when predicting delirium 12 h in advance. Calibration was similar in both models (mean Brier Score [95% CI] 0.102 [0.097 to 0.108] and 0.111 [0.106 to 0.116]). Model discrimination and calibration were maintained when tested on the validation datasets.ConclusionsMachine learning models trained with routinely collected electronic health record data accurately predict ICU delirium, supporting dynamic time-sensitive forecasting.Copyright © 2023, the American Society of Anesthesiologists. All Rights Reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.