• Am J Emerg Med · Nov 2023

    Review

    Performance of machine learning models in identifying and predicting patients' need for intensive care in emergency department triage: A systematic review.

    • Yujing Chen, Han Chen, Qian Sun, Rui Zhai, Xiaowei Liu, Jianyi Zhou, and Shufang Li.
    • The Eighth Clinical Medical College, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Foshan, Guangdong, China.
    • Am J Emerg Med. 2023 Nov 1; 73: 166170166-170.

    BackgroundThe emergency department (ED) triage process serves as a crucial first step for patients seeking acute care, This initial assessment holds crucial implications for patient survival and prognosis. In this study, a systematic review of the existing literature was performed to investigate the performance of machine learning (ML) models in recognizing and predicting the need for intensive care among ED patients.MethodsFour prominent databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) were searched for relevant literature published up to April 28, 2023. The Prediction model study Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was employed to evaluate the risk of bias and feasibility of prediction models.ResultsIn ten studies, the main algorithms used were Gradient Boostin, Logistic Regressio, Neural Network, Support Vector Machines, Random Forest. The performance of each model was as follows: Gradient Boosting had a sensitivity range of 0.3 to 0.96, specificity range of 0.6 to 0.99, accuracy range of 0.37 to 0.99, precision range of 0.3 to 0.96, and AUC value range of 0.68 to 0.93; Logistic Regression had a sensitivity range of 0.46 to 0.97, specificity range of 0.28 to 0.99, accuracy range of 0.66 to 0.97, precision range of 0.27 to 0.63, and AUC value range of 0.72 to 0.97; Neural Networks had a sensitivity range of 0.45 to 0.96, specificity range of 0.58 to 0.99, accuracy range of 0.36 to 0.97, precision range of 0.27 to 0.96, and AUC value range of 0.67 to 0.91; Support Vector Machines had a sensitivity range of 0.49 to 0.83, specificity range of 0.94 to 0.98, accuracy range of 0.33 to 0.97, precision range of 0.53 to 0.94, and AUC values were not reported; Random Forests had a sensitivity range of 0.75 to 0.91, specificity range of 0.77 to 0.94, accuracy range of 0.35 to 0.77, precision range of 0.36 to 0.94, and AUC value of 0.83.ConclusionML models have demonstrated good performance in identifying and predicting critically ill patients in ED triage. However, because of the limited number of studies on each model, further high-quality prospective research is needed to validate these findings.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. 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…